BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat
BattleTech Game Systems => Ground Combat => Topic started by: Matti on 15 April 2020, 13:57:05
-
Let's talk about advantages of light 'Mechs against heavier ones. Why would you, or anyone, take Panther over Griffin, or Valkyrie over Dervish? Why did Captain Mercer Ravannion take Stingers and Wasps instead of Jenners and Phoenix Hawks? Why haven't more factories been converted to produce stronger units, like one originally producing Sentinel was converted to produce Hatchetman?
Costs
Obviously lighter 'Mechs are cheaper to produce, sell, and buy. Also likely faster to produce with equal amount of resources, and easier for maintenance. These factors lead to better availability, and most certainly there are at least some situations where full company of Stingers is more useful than one lance of Phoenix Hawks.
Weight
This could be more significant than first meets the eye. Heavy factor in transportation: there are limits on how much VTOL can lift up. Aforementioned Captain Mercer Ravannion may have crammed most of his 'Mech force into Mule-class DropShip as cargo: 20-tons per 'Mech. This way more 'Mechs can be transported with less 'Ships.
Other factors
Time and technical resources. It took several years to convert a factory from Sentinel to Hatchetman production. In that time that factory (or part of the factory?) didn't build any 'Mechs. There is a historical example in time of Second World War, in USA: M3 tank remained in production throughout the war, likely because somebody decided more M3 right now is better than more M4 next month (or later). On top of a 'Mech factory itself, fusion engine factories and other industries would need conversions too. Much easier said than done.
Is there anything else to add? Fire at will.
-
you would only take it if you were scouting and needed something faster, or if you were in a FPS game and wanted something OP that was beefed up to make it worth taking.
-
There's a reason why real navies in the 20th Century built more Destroyers than Battleships. The Battleship can only be in one place at a time, and you can afford to produce a lot more DDs than BBs, send them to remote places faster, and with less fuel expense. The only times you needed the BBs were when confronting another BB or for heavy shore bombardment.
Mercer Ravannion apparently had the Stingers and Wasps available in quantity, while Jenners and Phoenix Hawks would have been in much shorter supply. Besides, we gamed out a situation along those lines using equal tonnage (before BV was a thing), and the Blackjacks had to be given a few breaks to make it playable, such as having the opposition come on in waves, one lance at a time 3-4 turns apart. Even then, we had to force the players running the Lights to engage with only similar or marginally higher numerical superiority, rather than sit back until the next wave came on, otherwise the Lights still took losses, but barely more than the Mediums. Swarming a single target works, especially when you can put your swarming units practically anywhere you want them to be.
In 3025 with Regular pilots, many of typical Lights can rack up high enough movement modifiers to make a fight difficult for slower units. That doesn't apply to 'Mechs like the Panther or Valkyrie, which have no such advantages over heavier designs. The Panther, in particular, is at a speed AND tonnage disadvantage against Mediums like the Griffin or Dervish, although I'd probably prefer fielding a Locust for engaging a Panther, and expect to either come back with a kill and practically no damage at all, or not come back.
Once better gunnery skills or Pulse weapons come into play, those Lights are simply targets, and "Speed=Armor" is no longer sufficient to keep the thin-skinned units alive.
-
The one thing Ravannion overlooked was that people are expensive. Not as expensive as ALL 'mechs, but expensive nonetheless.
-
Sometimes there are situations where you just don't want to show up with heavy mechs.
-
Sometimes you only need a light mech. A lance of bugs, 2 Stingers and 2 Wasps, is death on 8 legs to small vehicles and platoons of infantry.
-
It may be Succession War era economics. It's probably faster/cheaper to rebuild a light mech factory than one that produces heavier models. Also, the heavier factory's are more attractive as a strategic target than the light ones (how many 'Battles for Hesperus' did we see?).
Some jobs are performed better by lights. A lance of Stingers will be far more effective at crowd control/riot suppression/counter-insurgency than a single Zeus or pair of Blackjack's, although this is more of a strategic effect. In a one off game this doesn't really show very well.
-
There are problems with what you're talking about. First of all Light 'Mechs also die a lot easier. Secondly you're assuming that the cost of 'Mechs is linear with size/weight and combat power, we don't know this, it may well be that there's a base cost y, a tonnage scaling cost x, and a speed scaling cost z. Also given how readily armor and other repair materials are it's probably A) easier to repair a damaged heavy or assault after it's tangled with a lance of lights', B) There's probably some core component like the reactor, or more likely something in the control system that's limiting 'Mech supply. Also C) the owner of that heavy that tangled with your lights' can now but your lights' into his service, hopefully better then you. Thirdly the kind of hit and run tactics that could make lights' usable require more highly trained and experienced pilots, which aren't going to be easy to come by. In conjunction with my third point, the kind of extreme mobility present in BT would likely actually render hit and run tactics unworkable.
There's a reason why real navies in the 20th Century built more Destroyers than Battleships. The Battleship can only be in one place at a time, and you can afford to produce a lot more DDs than BBs, send them to remote places faster, and with less fuel expense. The only times you needed the BBs were when confronting another BB or for heavy shore bombardment.
-snip-
Two problem with this: 1) You're assuming that light 'Mechs are analogous to Destroyers in power, and that it very likely mistaken. 2) Destroyers worked because their primary purposes was to carry torpedoes, a great equalizer, something that doesn't exist in BT.
Sometimes you only need a light mech. A lance of bugs, 2 Stingers and 2 Wasps, is death on 8 legs to small vehicles and platoons of infantry.
But pretty much only that.
-
They are fine before pulse lasers, targeting computers and precision ac ammo . After that you are better off using combat vehicles for the light mech roles . A light mech still eats a 150 ton mech bay . That is 3 50 light vehicle bay . Most of which are better armored than a light mech . A faux light mech like a Cicada at least has more internal and about the same armor as a light mech as fast and well about as well armed . So I do not use light mechs much after 3058 and not at all by 3072 when the infrastructure for combat vehicles with fuel cell engines are just about everywhere in the Inner Sphere. As for cost the XL . engines on the later light mechs make them very expensive and more vulnerable. Cheap disposable and replaceable combat vehicle attrition units are the way to go .
For Solaris VII I made a 22 million C bill light mech that was great but Solaris VII runs on a different business model than a mercenary combat unit .
-
There are problems with what you're talking about. First of all Light 'Mechs also die a lot easier. Secondly you're assuming that the cost of 'Mechs is linear with size/weight and combat power, we don't know this, it may well be that there's a base cost y, a tonnage scaling cost x, and a speed scaling cost z. Also given how readily armor and other repair materials are it's probably A) easier to repair a damaged heavy or assault after it's tangled with a lance of lights',...
We have rules detailing the costs and repair modifiers, and there are actually a couple of exponential effects to cost, although most of the costs are indeed linear. A faster 'Mech pays more for its engine, and possibly gyro, than a slower 'Mech of comparable tonnage, but speed increases for heavier units require massive and prohibitively expensive engines and correspondingly larger and more expensive gyros. A Locust pays a far lower base cost for its 160 rated engine than an Atlas does for its 300 rated engine, and that cost rises exponentially with engine size, not linearly. There's also a final cost modifier based on tonnage, so even after the larger engine, bigger gyro, and other factors are taken into consideration, you still have a higher cost modifier for the sum of those components merely because they're for a larger 'Mech. The 20 ton Wasp or Stinger would pay a +20% final cost modifier added to the sum of the individual components upon final assembly due to tonnage, but an Atlas would pay a +100% cost increase for EVERY component due to its 100 ton frame.
Armor repairs cost the same for the same amount of damage, regardless of tonnage. Replacement actuators and other internal components do cost more for the larger 'Mech, although weapons don't.
Simply look at the prices. That fast Locust is just over 1.5 Million C-Bills (a huge chunk of that is engine and gyro cost), and a Stinger or Wasp is even cheaper, while an Atlas is in the 8 Million range. You can field a lot of "bug 'Mechs" for the price of an Atlas, even assuming that the factory for the Atlas hasn't already been destroyed as a high priority target.
-
There's a reason why real navies in the 20th Century built more Destroyers than Battleships. The Battleship can only be in one place at a time, and you can afford to produce a lot more DDs than BBs, send them to remote places faster, and with less fuel expense. The only times you needed the BBs were when confronting another BB or for heavy shore bombardment.
A large part of why navies built so many Destroyers in was because they lost so many. In WWII naval terms vessels like Destroyers were expendable by design - their purpose was to screen less expendable assets whether that was a convoy or a squadron of Battleships.
You can use light mechs in the same capacity if you want to - in fact some lights like the Commando and Battle Hawk seem to be purpose designed for the role. I would much rather lose a Commando driving off a P-Hawk than give that P-Hawk an unmolested run at the rear armour of my Zeus', for example.
-
You can use light mechs in the same capacity if you want to - in fact some lights like the Commando and Battle Hawk seem to be purpose designed for the role. I would much rather lose a Commando driving off a P-Hawk than give that P-Hawk an unmolested run at the rear armour of my Zeus', for example.
While it might screen off Locusts, and Spiders, I would advise against trying to use them to keep P-Hawks away. For one thing, it means that that mech might be within firing range of the Shadow Hawks, and Griffins. For another, P-Hawks can handle them in short order.
-
Another consideration is when playing on a strategic level (or on _really big_ maps on MM) ... if you've got no functional satellite overwatch, you may need a decent number of fast recon units to fan out and find the enemy - and then run away from them when located.
-
Sometimes there are situations where you just don't want to show up with heavy mechs.
This argument could be used for 'Mechs in general: why use any 'Mech for recon at all when Savannah Master and Ferret are around?
-
This argument could be used for 'Mechs in general: why use any 'Mech for recon at all when Savannah Master and Ferret are around?
The latter is in mortal danger to unexpected MANPAD popups or the weakest of AA. The former's reconnoitering can be foiled by a waist-high treeline.
-
Let's talk about advantages of light 'Mechs against heavier ones. Why would you, or anyone, take Panther over Griffin, or Valkyrie over Dervish? Why did Captain Mercer Ravannion take Stingers and Wasps instead of Jenners and Phoenix Hawks? Why haven't more factories been converted to produce stronger units, like one originally producing Sentinel was converted to produce Hatchetman?
Costs
Obviously lighter 'Mechs are cheaper to produce, sell, and buy. Also likely faster to produce with equal amount of resources, and easier for maintenance. These factors lead to better availability, and most certainly there are at least some situations where full company of Stingers is more useful than one lance of Phoenix Hawks.
Weight
This could be more significant than first meets the eye. Heavy factor in transportation: there are limits on how much VTOL can lift up. Aforementioned Captain Mercer Ravannion may have crammed most of his 'Mech force into Mule-class DropShip as cargo: 20-tons per 'Mech. This way more 'Mechs can be transported with less 'Ships.
Other factors
Time and technical resources. It took several years to convert a factory from Sentinel to Hatchetman production. In that time that factory (or part of the factory?) didn't build any 'Mechs. There is a historical example in time of Second World War, in USA: M3 tank remained in production throughout the war, likely because somebody decided more M3 right now is better than more M4 next month (or later). On top of a 'Mech factory itself, fusion engine factories and other industries would need conversions too. Much easier said than done.
Is there anything else to add? Fire at will.
with units like the Panther, the main driver is cost. The PNT-9R is cheaper for House Kurita to build, than a better mech is to import. (Kind of also why the Valkyrie kept being made after 3025).
In some cases, Weight can be a significant factor. like...bridges, or other structures. a Light 'mech might be able to actually land on a roof (and walk around) that a mech only 5 tons heavier will fall right through. (or, as happened in canon, a light 'mech running on lava-tubes might lure a heavier or heavy to their doom by crossing one full of hot, sticky, molten rock.)
certain quirks become relevant as well-like size, low profile etc.
-
certain quirks become relevant as well-like size, low profile etc.
I don't recall Total Warfare or Tactical Operations detailing such things... ::)
-
I don't recall Total Warfare or Tactical Operations detailing such things... ::)
considering that I don't use 'Quirks' anymore than employing 'powerups'...but it was included in some of the optional-optional rules, so meh.
-
Within a given speed band (4/6, 5/8, 6/9), you’re usually better off with a heavier mech. But there are exceptions:
— Really heavy engines. A 50-tonner going 8/12 is usually less efficient than a lighter design going 8/12 due to its 400-rated engine, for example.
— Breakpoints on Jump Jets, Gyros, and other weight-sensitive components. A 50-ton jumper is usually better than a 60-ton jumper, for example.
— BV, Tonnage, and Cost Caps. Lighter mechs are generally going to use up less of your budget under any of these metrics. You can only afford what you can afford.
— Quirks. Only light and medium mechs can have the Compact quirk, which is useful logistically. Fluff-wise, they also lend themselves to the Narrow/Low Profile quick, which give a to-hit bonus. (But in theory an assault mech could have this quirk.)
Part of the problem with lighter mechs as technology gets deadlier is that they’re not expendable enough. Something less expensive that can be fielded in larger numbers would often be more useful. And the Clans went that way with the ProtoMech.
-
The latter is in mortal danger to unexpected MANPAD popups or the weakest of AA. The former's reconnoitering can be foiled by a waist-high treeline.
This, very much. No matter how cheap a conventional vehicle is, no vee can ever match a mech's ability to traverse almost any terrain in almost any weather, and those that can are either extremely specialized to a given environment (subs, etc), or far more fragile than any mech (VTOLs).
Regarding that last point, have you ever tried to kill a Stinger or Locust in a single salvo? We see them as being easily squishable, but that's because most games are predominately populated with medium/heavy/assault mechs, and even those usually need to focus their entire attention on a Bug for at least a turn to bring it down. From other lights or light vees or ghu forbid, infantry? The kind of stuff you actually send on boring patrols or long-distance scout missions? Infantry can be killed, vehicles can get parked or side-critter, air units can get lawn-darted...but unless you're packing big boy firepower, I can almost guarantee that Stinger will survive the surprise first salvo and get a chance to run away and/or report your position. And that's what a scout's speed is for. It's not too race forward and find the enemy. It's to find the enemy, and race backward to live long enough to report the contact.
-
While it might screen off Locusts, and Spiders, I would advise against trying to use them to keep P-Hawks away. For one thing, it means that that mech might be within firing range of the Shadow Hawks, and Griffins. For another, P-Hawks can handle them in short order.
For all the fact that a P-hawk can very well tackle either of the lights I mentioned, do bear in mind that I would be perfectly happy to lose the light if it either:
a) did sufficient damage to the P-hawk, such that the heavier mech that it was escorting can no casually finish the P-hawk off with it's own shooting, or;
b) ties up the P-hawk for long enough that the escorted heavy mech can either get away from the immediate danger or perform whatever function I wanted from it unmolested.
Naturally, if I wanted to take on a P-hawk and win I wouldn't assign a light mech to the task at all, but if I simply wanted speed bump intended to slow down something trying to interdict my main force, then an inexpensive light mech is well suited to the job.
-
While the Commando does have a fantastic theoretical damage tally, it rarely inflicts it. One of its primary weaknesses is the armor placement to ammo placement risk it takes. This causes the Commando to be easy prey to mechs fielding Large Lasers, or PPCs.
-
We have rules detailing the costs and repair modifiers, and there are actually a couple of exponential effects to cost, although most of the costs are indeed linear. A faster 'Mech pays more for its engine, and possibly gyro, than a slower 'Mech of comparable tonnage, but speed increases for heavier units require massive and prohibitively expensive engines and correspondingly larger and more expensive gyros. A Locust pays a far lower base cost for its 160 rated engine than an Atlas does for its 300 rated engine, and that cost rises exponentially with engine size, not linearly. There's also a final cost modifier based on tonnage, so even after the larger engine, bigger gyro, and other factors are taken into consideration, you still have a higher cost modifier for the sum of those components merely because they're for a larger 'Mech. The 20 ton Wasp or Stinger would pay a +20% final cost modifier added to the sum of the individual components upon final assembly due to tonnage, but an Atlas would pay a +100% cost increase for EVERY component due to its 100 ton frame.
The problem is that the formula's we have are FASA-era nonsense, don't put any stock into them
Armor repairs cost the same for the same amount of damage, regardless of tonnage. Replacement actuators and other internal components do cost more for the larger 'Mech, although weapons don't.
My point is that those costs are trival to some unseen and unknowable cost of actually building a 'Mech
This, very much. No matter how cheap a conventional vehicle is, no vee can ever match a mech's ability to traverse almost any terrain in almost any weather, and those that can are either extremely specialized to a given environment (subs, etc), or far more fragile than any mech (VTOLs).
True, but if compare the amount of armor that VTOL's carry, or rather can carry if well designed.
-
The problem is that the formula's we have are FASA-era nonsense, don't put any stock into themMy point is that those costs are trival to some unseen and unknowable cost of actually building a 'Mech
True, but if compare the amount of armor that VTOL's carry, or rather can carry if well designed.
very FEW VTOLs in canon are actually well-designed, and this is in spite of rules-changes to make the truly awful one minimally viable.
There are, by contrast, relatively few (as a percentage) 'mechs that are absolute garbage-even in the light classification.
(even a lance of ALM Fireballs mixed with urbies can, in fact, be used intelligently. This is somewhat to completely untrue of, for example, the yellowjacket.)
-
I believe you yourself commented that they could be used intelligently... as spare parts! :D
-
They're great for weeding out enemy agents in the quartermaster corps.
-
They're great for weeding out enemy agents in the quartermaster corps.
To a certain extent so are light 'Mechs, just look at the Locust LCT-1M.
-
Pro: Easier to replace when a Hunchback blasts clean through their center torso in one shot.
On the other hand, an AC20 to the center torso doesn't core a Warhammer, it just pisses it off.
-
Pro: Easier to replace when a Hunchback blasts clean through their center torso in one shot.
On the other hand, an AC20 to the center torso doesn't core a Warhammer, it just pisses it off.
pffft, my WHM center torso just screams to be critted ... at near 18 hexes by an AC-5. enough about my bad luck.
I would think that during many eras of play, you took whatever was available. Light mechs die quick, as do vehs. Better mechs are rarer due to attrition of production. This isn't rock-paper-scissor anymore -- It's how many rocks, paper, scissors do you have at each mission. Just don't invite WoB, they're poor winners.
[edit: bad to post near bedtime; I'm not sure I added anything to 'Advantages of Light Mechs']
-
Pro: Easier to replace when a Hunchback blasts clean through their center torso in one shot.
The thing is we don't actually know this, there's some sort of in-universe limiting factor on 'Mech production and it's not reactors. My personal theory/headcanon is that it's something in the control system, likely to do with the neural connector especially given that ASF are also seemingly affected, this actually makes the whole-head ejection system of the Hatchetman very nice as it may well save that key hard-to-replace component.
-
To a certain extent so are light 'Mechs, just look at the Locust LCT-1M.
I like the 1M. It fills certain roles that other 3025 mechs don't. As long as you've got room to move, a group of 1Ms can bomb a target without ever taking any return fire. They're extreme specialists, and you don't want a large portion of your force to be made up of them, but they definitely have their uses.
-
have you ever tried to kill a Stinger or Locust in a single salvo?
People really should listen to Weirdo more often. I think the above point needs more recognition.
-
The thing is we don't actually know this, there's some sort of in-universe limiting factor on 'Mech production and it's not reactors. My personal theory/headcanon is that it's something in the control system, likely to do with the neural connector especially given that ASF are also seemingly affected, this actually makes the whole-head ejection system of the Hatchetman very nice as it may well save that key hard-to-replace component.
I've long considered it an inherent part of the Inner Sphere's pseudo-feudal governmental system. You might be a hotshot Coordinator or First Prince, but there are people under you who are power-hungry bastards and will happily replace you if possible. Feudal systems have always had to strike a balance between defending the realm, and keeping the nobles from gaining too much power.
You don't want your cousin, Duke Backstabber, to be able to churn out as many Warhammers as his factory will produce. Oftentimes it's more important to keep him from growing his army than it is to have that army at your disposal. Yeah a couple extra mech Divisions would be great, but not if they're under his control (and they would be). So you're gonna make sure that your fusion engine factory is always experiencing a supply shortage when the Duke comes calling. "Sorry buddy, I can only spare 10 engines this year..."
Basically everybody is doing the same thing back and forth to each other when it comes to mech production. It's not all technology loss.
-
People really should listen to Weirdo more often.
I do what now?
-
Battletech armies (at least up until the Clan Invasion) seem to have achieved a certain level of balance. There's a customary amount of opposition that you expect to face when conducting a war, and people don't seem to vary from it much. It's not necessarily a gentleman's agreement, but more like a general resignation to the way things are.
Any planet could press their population into service and spam tens of thousands of infantry regiments. The problems with that are 1) it would work for one battle, and 2) you'd much rather if your general population doesn't think they can fight. The next time somebody invaded your world, they'd bring thousands of inferno bombs for their ASFs, and they'd bring lots of artillery. Then your population would demand to know why you led them to the slaughter, they'd revolt, and suddenly you have a real problem on your hands.
The nobleman who is defending the planet wants to keep his power secure, that's part of why he doesn't draft huge numbers of civilians. As a result you're going to get smaller conventional armies. He don't go with masses of light vehicles because he doesn't want to upset the apple cart. And all nobles are facing the same potential problems, so they all go with the same solutions.
That means Planet X doesn't have a large Air Force of 8,000 conventional fighters. Instead they'll have 18 Aerospace Fighters, all of them piloted by 2nd and 3rd sons of minor families, with 50 or so conventional fighters backing them up. Mechs are gonna be the same. You don't want to distribute your personal political power to the masses, so vehicles and infantry are always going to be supplements to Battlemechs.
-
And because not every planet is of the same importance level, it means that some planets are going to get multiple regiments of heavy and assault mechs, and some planets are going to get a lance of Urbanmechs and be told to be happy with that.
-
I like the 1M. It fills certain roles that other 3025 mechs don't. As long as you've got room to move, a group of 1Ms can bomb a target without ever taking any return fire. They're extreme specialists, and you don't want a large portion of your force to be made up of them, but they definitely have their uses.
The Hornet and the Valkyrie are both better options for this, not as fast but they don't fold like wet tissue paper when hit.
I've long considered it an inherent part of the Inner Sphere's pseudo-feudal governmental system. You might be a hotshot Coordinator or First Prince, but there are people under you who are power-hungry bastards and will happily replace you if possible. Feudal systems have always had to strike a balance between defending the realm, and keeping the nobles from gaining too much power.
You don't want your cousin, Duke Backstabber, to be able to churn out as many Warhammers as his factory will produce. Oftentimes it's more important to keep him from growing his army than it is to have that army at your disposal. Yeah a couple extra mech Divisions would be great, but not if they're under his control (and they would be). So you're gonna make sure that your fusion engine factory is always experiencing a supply shortage when the Duke comes calling. "Sorry buddy, I can only spare 10 engines this year..."
Basically everybody is doing the same thing back and forth to each other when it comes to mech production. It's not all technology loss.
Neo-Feudlism doesn't quite work like that. From the real world it takes nonsensical idea of privatized weapons development and production, and makes it work (All I'm saying on the subject because anything more is likely to break the rules), importantly here the Duke who's responsible for the area the factory is located in won't own the factory, so he doesn't really get a say in what happens to what it makes. Also as the fusion engines have to be shipped in Hanse Davion knows exactly how many 'Mechs should come out of the factory each year, because you know, he provided the critical supply of fusion reactors, if the numbers don't add up he can take action. Finally there's the matter of the fact that pulling tricks like that is treason and is the kind-of thing that see's you losing your titles and being hung.
-
The Hornet and the Valkyrie are both better options for this, not as fast but they don't fold like wet tissue paper when hit.
Yeah but if you do it right, the Locusts don't get hit at all. A lance of 1Ms has the firepower of an Archer, and twice the speed. I've used them for indirect fire before. Park them behind a hill or a cluster of buildings, lob missiles at a target until people get pissed and come after you, then zoom away and they'll never even get LOS.
Neo-Feudlism doesn't quite work like that. From the real world it takes nonsensical idea of privatized weapons development and production, and makes it work (All I'm saying on the subject because anything more is likely to break the rules), importantly here the Duke who's responsible for the area the factory is located in won't own the factory, so he doesn't really get a say in what happens to what it makes. Also as the fusion engines have to be shipped in Hanse Davion knows exactly how many 'Mechs should come out of the factory each year, because you know, he provided the critical supply of fusion reactors, if the numbers don't add up he can take action. Finally there's the matter of the fact that pulling tricks like that is treason and is the kind-of thing that see's you losing your titles and being hung.
Some of the old Fed Suns stuff refers to all the problems that Hanse Davion had with the nobles. You don't have to openly rebel to make life miserable for the Prince.
-
I've long considered it an inherent part of the Inner Sphere's pseudo-feudal governmental system. You might be a hotshot Coordinator or First Prince, but there are people under you who are power-hungry bastards and will happily replace you if possible. Feudal systems have always had to strike a balance between defending the realm, and keeping the nobles from gaining too much power.
You don't want your cousin, Duke Backstabber, to be able to churn out as many Warhammers as his factory will produce. Oftentimes it's more important to keep him from growing his army than it is to have that army at your disposal. Yeah a couple extra mech Divisions would be great, but not if they're under his control (and they would be). So you're gonna make sure that your fusion engine factory is always experiencing a supply shortage when the Duke comes calling. "Sorry buddy, I can only spare 10 engines this year..."
Basically everybody is doing the same thing back and forth to each other when it comes to mech production. It's not all technology loss.
eh, not QUITE.
Feudalism is just a term. The actual function is when you have centralized control over some vital resource (in the middle ages it was arable land and the ability to employ force) and that control has devolved to a hereditary structure with limited to nonexistent movement upward in the social strata.
If you can think of anywhere infamous for needing 'connections' to rise? it's the same thing. You can have a Feudal system where everyone has corporate titles, or where everyone has "elected" titles. it's the mechanism. In a Feudal Society, the State controls the vital means of production, and has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force, AND requires Fealty while also encouraging Hereditary ties when distributing authority (IOW, you have to have an insider 'invite' you in before you can move up in society).
You can get a Feudal condition in a Bureaucratic state, it's all about how power is centralized and distributed.
basically, if you can be born in poverty, and build or buy your way into the upper levels of power without being married to or related to, or best friends with, someone in power? you probably don't live in a Feudal state, or you live in a weak feudal state.
The other big indicator is if your distribution curve is triangular, or diamond shaped. what I mean by this, is in a triangular wealth distribution model, your largest 'class' is the lowest-the majority of your population lives in effectively poverty, in a diamond shaped distribution, you have a small percentage that is genuinely poor, a large middle class, and a small elite.
Typically it's easier to rise in a diamond graph, than in a triangular graph.
Notably, Feudal systems regardless of title origin tend to be triangular graphs. (vast population of serfs, middling population of craftsman and merchants, small population of a given elite.)
There are no diamond-graph states in the Inner Sphere OR the Clans. They're all heavily centralized with control of one resource or another in the hands of the same ruling class that has a monopoly on the use of force, whether that small group is ostensibly elected (OWA, Taurian Concordat, etc. etc.) or appointed (Magistracy, CapCon, LC, FWL) or openly inherited monarchy (Federated Suns) the core shared characteristic is that like the Clans, that elite is very small, and like the Clans, the lowest class is also the largest class in raw population numbers, while also having the fewest rights and protections.
like the OWA, the Free Worlds League is a 'cosmetic republic'-meaning they have ritualized "elections" that put members of the same family in the same position generation after generation. (this is also true of the CapCon and, to an extent, the Combine-though the Combine's model is a more honest Military Junta model-they don't PRETEND to have elections.)
In the Lyran Commonwealth, the Archon is technically answerable to the Estates General, but...again, the position is just as hereditary as it is in the OPENLY Monarchial Federated Suns.
in the end, the real question tends to end up being; "How shitty is your life at the bottom of the pyramid?" that ends up being your only REAL measure of difference between the various states and the Clans-in terms of government.
what ends up, is that it's shittier in some places, than in others, or it's shitty in different ways. (one state might let you have a technical free speech, while the Lords enforcers may use technicalities in other behaviours to punish you for it, while in another state they're honest about delivering that midnight knock on your door with a trip to sleep with the fishes for posting that disrespectful meme on 4Chan, or even so direct and clear about what kind of universe you're inhabiting that they bill your family for the rope they hang you with or the bullet that was put in your brain for shooting your mouth off at the wrong time in public.)
which all circles the bowl back to the 'technology loss'. In highly centralized systems you get a high level of both official, and unofficial corruption. Yes, graft, and sweet sweet corruption. This can range from "They pretend to pay us so we pretend to work", to using materials, parts, and production delays as political weapons to topple ambitious cousins/aunts/uncles/siblings, to leeching off of a system that hasn't been competently run for generations and 'looking out for number one' at the expense of everyone around you. (Mandarins, Social Generals, Petit Nobility, and so on.)
The Tech wasn't "lost", it may, however, have become buried in layers of apathy, graft, internal theft, black markets (because any time you restrict something, you will create a black market), intentional sabotage, porous security, more apathy, contrary ambitions, unscientific scientificism...take your pick, it's probably all of that and more.
After all, they pretend to pay us, why shouldn't we pretend to work?
-
Well, I think the important thing to take from it, as far as how it applies to the game, is that you don't mobilize the peasants. If you're the ruler of some generic planet, you don't really want to give guns and tanks to the rabble. They might start getting ideas. Not only that, but if you care about your people in the slightest, you don't want to encourage your enemies to bring big area of effect weapons, because they will.
-
I've long considered it an inherent part of the Inner Sphere's pseudo-feudal governmental system. You might be a hotshot Coordinator or First Prince, but there are people under you who are power-hungry bastards and will happily replace you if possible. Feudal systems have always had to strike a balance between defending the realm, and keeping the nobles from gaining too much power.
Takashi Kurita is described just like this. On the other hand, Hanse Davion seems to be more trusting of his population, with some exceptions.
You don't want your cousin, Duke Backstabber, to be able to churn out as many Warhammers as his factory will produce. Oftentimes it's more important to keep him from growing his army than it is to have that army at your disposal.
Capellan Confederation don't seem to care about it after Fourth Succession War, but is described to recruit and draft as much personnel as possible while turning military hardware production up to 11, AFTER losing some significant production facilities.
-
Yeah but if you do it right, the Locusts don't get hit at all. A lance of 1Ms has the firepower of an Archer, and twice the speed. I've used them for indirect fire before. Park them behind a hill or a cluster of buildings, lob missiles at a target until people get pissed and come after you, then zoom away and they'll never even get LOS.
This is an incredibly stupid tactic.
-
This is an incredibly stupid tactic.
I have to strongly disagree. If you need a force to get the enemy out of position, it's excellent. The efficacy of tactics is deeply dependent on what the objective and scenario on the ground is.
-
I think one of the advantages of lights might be that many times they are often overlooked. Until that Wasp-W is jumping out of a tree line and lighting up your backside with a bunch of SLs.
-
I'll third or fourth (lost count) the -1M tactic, especially since a full lance is barely 200bv more than a single base model Archer. So long as you've got the room to maneuver, you can evade many of the raiders people would send to silence a fire lance, and the ones that can catch them have to be careful, because the Locusts can spread out so that closing with one of them means easy shots from the other three...and anything that can catch a Locust probably isn't tough enough to face six 5-packs without flinching.
-
Another vote for fire-support -1Ms. I fail to see how using a mobile fire-support force to bombard other 'Mechs with impunity is a "stupid tactic".
-
another thumbs-up for the 1M Locust. Mobile harassment and fire-support is one of those pillars for non-static players.
The ability to either hit enemy close-formations from the flanks and sides isn't to be ignored, forcing the in-echelon stand-around-rolling-dice players to break up and deal with those long-ranged flank harassers? pretty damn useful.
There's the Initiative roll and Initiative order, but there's also taking the initiative in spite of the roll.
That's the core of running Light 'mech (or any light unit) right there-to generate tactical dilemmas that aren't cured by a single lucky die roll. Most of the time, this involves some version of tactical ****** and Light, speedy 'mechs are great for that job.
-
Lights can go places other mechs cannot, like to tops of buildings (without ending up in the basement).
-
With advanced technology and good assets, I don't think that single light battlemech will be worth enough to take one unit in the standard battlemech lance. Medium battlemechs are able to take the role of the light right now, and they are also quite survivable and more powerful as well.
But what I keep in mind is... what about to orgamize them as the squad of bigger protomech? Like as organize 3 to 6 lights as one same squad, and that is considered as equal to ONE battlemech, rather than a lance. So, instead of take a standard battlemech in a lance, you can take a squad of light battlemech in the place of the mech.
Let's be honest. Light's advantage is the cheap cost - that means it is the inferior war machine compared by medium to higher battlemech. Then, why not to just regard them as the cheaper line trooper?
-
With advanced technology and good assets, I don't think that single light battlemech will be worth enough to take one unit in the standard battlemech lance. Medium battlemechs are able to take the role of the light right now, and they are also quite survivable and more powerful as well.
But what I keep in mind is... what about to orgamize them as the squad of bigger protomech? Like as organize 3 to 6 lights as one same squad, and that is considered as equal to ONE battlemech, rather than a lance. So, instead of take a standard battlemech in a lance, you can take a squad of light battlemech in the place of the mech.
Let's be honest. Light's advantage is the cheap cost - that means it is the inferior war machine compared by medium to higher battlemech. Then, why not to just regard them as the cheaper line trooper?
There are a number of lights that perform much needed roles well. The HER-4S, and Owens are easy examples.
-
Oooo...LCT-1Ms loaded entirely with Swarms. Find an opponent that enjoys tight-knit formations of tanks, and go to town. >:D
-
I have to strongly disagree. If you need a force to get the enemy out of position, it's excellent. The efficacy of tactics is deeply dependent on what the objective and scenario on the ground is.
Let me rephrase that: Relay on not getting hit is an incredibly stupid tactic.
With advanced technology and good assets, I don't think that single light battlemech will be worth enough to take one unit in the standard battlemech lance. Medium battlemechs are able to take the role of the light right now, and they are also quite survivable and more powerful as well.
But what I keep in mind is... what about to orgamize them as the squad of bigger protomech? Like as organize 3 to 6 lights as one same squad, and that is considered as equal to ONE battlemech, rather than a lance. So, instead of take a standard battlemech in a lance, you can take a squad of light battlemech in the place of the mech.
Let's be honest. Light's advantage is the cheap cost - that means it is the inferior war machine compared by medium to higher battlemech. Then, why not to just regard them as the cheaper line trooper?
Even before the return of LosTech they where incredibly iffy in the sub-30 ton range.
-
Let me rephrase that: Relay on not getting hit is an incredibly stupid tactic.
He never said anything about that. Evading fire and avoiding LoS are two very different paths to the same goal. And for the vast majority of non-aero units in the game (especially in the 3025-ish timeframe this particular bit of conversation seems to be focused on), gaining LoS to a Locust that doesn't want it is...I won't say impossible, but it's definitely a very dicey proposition.
-
Also remember that the LCT-1M's arms can be flipped. You can engage with LRM's while running away.
-
A lance of LCT-1Ms?
That sounds more like a way to dynamically deploy Thunder LRM minefields.
-
And for the vast majority of non-aero units in the game (especially in the 3025-ish timeframe this particular bit of conversation seems to be focused on), gaining LoS to a Locust that doesn't want it is...I won't say impossible, but it's definitely a very dicey proposition.
Couple helicopters to track Locust force's movements and to guide armed hovercrafts in their way. Hovertank with a fusion engine and PPC (the one that got retconned to ICE and named LTV4) would be serious threat to ANY Locust, and I imagine even Harasser LRM variant can ruin the day. AC/2 dakka from Warrior to Locust's rear armor is something to be considered as well.
-
A lance of LCT-1Ms?
That sounds more like a way to dynamically deploy Thunder LRM minefields.
I like your thinking.
-
Check out The price of a Jenner 2 C . 7 million and change. For that much cash you can just about buy an old Awesome 8Q Assault mech . You almost certainly buy 3 light combat vehicles w fuel cell engines that provide the motive power for it's mass as a light fusion engine . So after 3072 there are No advantages to light mechs other than operating on an airless moon . Oh with the advent of infantry HVAC field guns imagine your light mech moving to close on such a position with all infantry units ignoring the light mech's movement modifier as all infantry formations do . With ER PPC ranges the mech gets hit 1-4 times before machine gunning the field gun position. I think a platoon of 28 can operate 2 HVAC 10s . Outside urban militia defense and Solaris VII light mechs just do not cut it as the time line rolls on . My answer depending on ERA they aren't any advantages to light mechs period .
-
...imagine your light mech moving to close on such a position with all infantry units ignoring the light mech's movement modifier as all infantry formations do.
As no infantry formations do. This is not, and has never been, a thing. Infantry have the same issues hitting fast units as anything else.
-
Not quite the same... they ignore their OWN movement, not the target's.
-
All infantry can ignore is the modifier of Null-Signature System or Stealth Armor of battlemech/vehicle. But most battlemechs are not have such device.
-
To riff off of Natasha Kerensky's point:
The main advantages of light 'Mechs appear at the movement profiles where the light weight class is optimal. Which means above 7/11 for a standard engine, above 8/12 for a LFE, etc. Sometimes you want to be able to run that fast, and those are the situations when a light 'Mech is best.
-
Check out The price of a Jenner 2 C . 7 million and change. For that much cash you can just about buy an old Awesome 8Q Assault mech . You almost certainly buy 3 light combat vehicles w fuel cell engines that provide the motive power for it's mass as a light fusion engine . So after 3072 there are No advantages to light mechs other than operating on an airless moon . Oh with the advent of infantry HVAC field guns imagine your light mech moving to close on such a position with all infantry units ignoring the light mech's movement modifier as all infantry formations do . With ER PPC ranges the mech gets hit 1-4 times before machine gunning the field gun position. I think a platoon of 28 can operate 2 HVAC 10s . Outside urban militia defense and Solaris VII light mechs just do not cut it as the time line rolls on . My answer depending on ERA they aren't any advantages to light mechs period .
C-Bill value is not and never has been a valid means of comparing different mechs. It's always been random and arbitrary, and as some posters like to regularly point out, the cost of different items never changes once they're introduced- XXL Engines are still as expensive in the late Dark Age as they were when the NAIS was building them by hand in the 3050s, despite the Sea Foxes selling Mad Cat Mk IVs to everyone and their mums.
-
And because not every planet is of the same importance level, it means that some planets are going to get multiple regiments of heavy and assault mechs, and some planets are going to get a lance of Urbanmechs and be told to be happy with that.
Hence why so many Merc companies exist.. To make up the slak for those planets neutered by the upper chains..
-
Couple helicopters to track Locust force's movements and to guide armed hovercrafts in their way. Hovertank with a fusion engine and PPC (the one that got retconned to ICE and named LTV4) would be serious threat to ANY Locust, and I imagine even Harasser LRM variant can ruin the day. AC/2 dakka from Warrior to Locust's rear armor is something to be considered as well.
That's a lot of dedicated equipment to hunt something that is a rare specialist. And what happens if the Locusts run back to the safety of another unit?
-
There's also the twin problems of trying to catch something as fast as a Locust, and the fact that hovercraft simply can't cross some types of terrain that mechs have no trouble navigating (something that was previously mentioned).
-
I've always seen movement as the defining feature of a mech's role. The reason for light mechs is to move faster than anything heavier can and effectively mount more payload. For me that means getting 7/11 and 8/12 movement profiles are the reason to field a light in the SW era. Once the Clans comes along, if you're not moving 9/14 or faster, why not be medium instead?
Cheers,
LCC
-
I've always seen movement as the defining feature of a mech's role. The reason for light mechs is to move faster than anything heavier can and effectively mount more payload. For me that means getting 7/11 and 8/12 movement profiles are the reason to field a light in the SW era. Once the Clans comes along, if you're not moving 9/14 or faster, why not be medium instead?
Exactly this.
-
I'd say you've got a few basic categories of light mech. Let's just call them Bugs, Bug Killers, Scouts, Fire Support, Light Troopers.
Bug mechs are the classic Stinger, Wasp, and Locust. These are the most common. They are cheap to produce, and they are plentiful even in the depths of the 3rd Succession War. The advantage of Bugs is that they're fast and they're really dangerous in low-intensity conflicts. A Bug mech is flat out terrifying against a basic platoon of infantry that's not tricked out for anti-mech operations. You can have Bugs roam the countryside seeking targets of opportunity. Is that a caravan of ammo trucks driving down the highway? Well it's a dead caravan now. Bugs create chaos and create discord in your enemy's backfield. You're trying to quickly engage the softest targets you can find.
Bug Killers are designed to stop that shit. Commandos, Javelins, and Jenners are all tough enough to put the beat down on any Bugs they find. They aren't as plentiful, and they're more expensive, but they should basically win every engagement against a Bug. Might as well paint up a Jenner like the Orkin Man. You need some amount of Bug Killers in your force to keep your enemy honest. Otherwise your rear forces will never have a moment's rest.
Scouts are mechs like the Spider, Raven, and Ostscout. These are not intended for combat at all. Their job is to get communications or scanning equipment to a certain location and then stay alive. These are generally going to be attached to Battalions and Regiments. You want them cheap and fast, so they can get where you need them and hopefully stay alive.
In TRO: 3025, the only real dedicated Fire Support light is the Valkyrie, though you could make arguments for others. It's an LRM-10 on a cheap, mobile platform. If it's out of sight providing indirect fire, you can't tell the difference between it and a Griffin. It's a supplement to your normal fire support and it doesn't cost that much money (this way you can have more of them, or have them in more places). Alternatively, it is mobile enough that it can get to those hard to reach spots. Imagine trying to move your Archers through mountainous terrain.
Light Troopers are the Urbanmech and the Panther. They hit hard and they're pretty tough for a small mech. Again, these are cheap enough that you can field a lot of them. That's the point. You really have to dedicate some serious firepower to kill a Panther, almost as much as a real mech like a Wolverine or Centurion. But a PPC is a PPC.
-
Consider VTOL is up to 30t or 60t if superheavy, and battlemechs with 40 to 55 tons can have as much MP as its smaller cousin, I don't think that battlemechs with 35 tons or less can have much reason to worth a single battlemech slot. That's why I think that the solution for light mech is just accept that it is inferior and consider a team of them as the equivalent of a standard battlemech.
Perhaps light have more ground MP than mediums, but for Jump MP medium is nothing less, or even better than lights because of lights' poor spare tonnage. Why you are bothered to use lights if you can make a medium with Jump MP 10 or a VTOL with Cruise MP 10 or more? And, if you just use ground MP then hovers are also good as well. But in the reality there are a plenty of terrain feature to block your movement.
-
Exactly this.
Yes it is also clearly seen with the 5M & 6M variants of the Locust. Faster and Fastest.
-
That's a lot of dedicated equipment to hunt something that is a rare specialist. And what happens if the Locusts run back to the safety of another unit?
It's not that a unit would have hovers to track the Locusts, and hovercraft to attack them, and VTOLs to go whether hovercraft can't. Any one of those solutions is, at most, a platoon of light vehicles that can be used for other things. A platoon of VTOLs or Hovercraft that can run down and engage locusts can scout, or engage a heavier force on the flanks (sure, a platoon of AC2 Warriors isn't a big threat, but it's a constant annoyance. Like mosquitoes), etc. Even a vehicle unit that's too light to actually engage the Locusts (a couple of Ferrets, say) they can keep tabs on them and tell your main force where to setup up a couple of hunter-killer lights to cut them off or ambush them.
-
You can have Bugs roam the countryside seeking targets of opportunity. Is that a caravan of ammo trucks driving down the highway? Well it's a dead caravan now.
Careful! Some trucks are known to be armed with missiles (practically technicals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_(vehicle))). Yes, they're canon. Yes, I know 1 medium laser hit can destroy such vehicle.
-
That's a good reason for every bug ever to drop half a ton of ammo for a Recon Camera. Know what you're chasing!
-
Well, although it is about customs, but...
I came up with a chart for this once, but I seem to have lost it when my old computer died on me.
Edit:
Okay, here's a chart I recreated using SSW to get the values. There's an admitted bias towards, "How much tonnage can I spend on weapons?" As such, the chart lists the mechs that provide the most spare tonnage for a given movement rating. I decided to split the chart by engine type (because one looks shows that it radically shifts what the "ideal weight" is) and whether or not a mech carries max armor (because while fans like to do so, in-universe seems to be a different story).
|----------- Standard Engine ----------- | -------------Light Engine-------------- | --------------XL Engine----------------
|----w/o Armor------ | ---w/ Max Armor-- | ----w/o Armor----- | ---w/ Max Armor-- | ----w/o Armor------ | ---w/ Max Armor--
Walk | Mech Payload | Mech Payload | Mech Payload | Mech Payload | Mech Payload | Mech Payload
Speed |Tonnage Tonnage | Tonnage Tonnage | Tonnage Tonnage | Tonnage Tonnage | Tonnage Tonnage | Tonnage Tonnage
3 | 100 65 | 100 46 | 100 69.5 | 100 50.5 | 100 74.5 | 100 55.5
4 |75,80,85 42.5 | 75 28 | 85,90 49 | 75,80,85 32.5 | 95 58 | 90,95 40
5 | 60 29 | 55,60 16.5 | 60,65,70 33.5 | 60 21 | 70,75 41 | 70 27.5
6 | 45,50 20 | 45 10.5 | 50 24.5 | 45,50 14 | 60 30.5 | 50 19
7 | 40 14 | 35 6 | 40 18 | 40 9.5 | 50 23 | 40 13.5
8 | 30,35 9.5 | 25 3.5 | 35 13.5 | 35 6 | 35,40 17.5 | 35 10
9 | 25,30 6.5 | 20 2 | 30 10 | 20,25,30 3.5 | 30,35 13.5 | 30 7
10 | 20 4.5 | 20 0.5 | 25 7 | 20 2.5 | 30 11.5 | 30 5
Notes:
"w/ Max Armor assumes "Efficient maximum", which is to say that extra half tons of armor are not applied if all AP can't be used. Also assumes standard armor.
"Mech Tonnage" means the total weight of the mech.
"Payload tonnage" is left over tonnage after Engine, Standard Gyro, Head, and Standard Internal Structure have been accounted for. Does not include armor except under the "w/ Max Armor" sub-category
it would be a reference to consider how useful lights are.
It is expected that lights are use XL engine, if you consider them as the functional battlemech. But, if you use that, then you are better off use 30 or more. Even if so, these light mechs are not able to add enough jump jets fit with its Walk MP. Jump is not essential, but if you expect light to be survive by movement modifier, and they are usually scouts but not damage dealer, you better consider jump capability.
And medium mechs are already capable of get Jump MP 7 or more, by either Partial Wings or Improved Jump Jets(or combine both of them to maximize its speed). If you squeeze in the equipments well, you CAN make a 55 ton battlemech with Jump MP 10, with almost full armor.
Not to mention about LAM, which can get Cruise MP 14 quite easily on AirMech mode, although it doesn't have the mobility of jump.
Although LAM is extinct now, but partial wings and IJJ are available now, and that's already enough to allowing mediums to take the place of lights. I don't think that it is bad, for tanks in real worlds are also evolves like that. But, it leaves light only inferior to mediums, have no advantage but does not have the niche either.
Perhaps the only thing can consider is city fight, for light mechs are able to step the top of the building but mediums or heavier one usually destroys it in the process. But even in this case, what you can consider is no more than urbies, that is cheaper but inferior unit.
-
Bug mechs are the classic Stinger, Wasp, and Locust. These are the most common. They are cheap to produce, and they are plentiful even in the depths of the 3rd Succession War. The advantage of Bugs is that they're fast and they're really dangerous in low-intensity conflicts. A Bug mech is flat out terrifying against a basic platoon of infantry that's not tricked out for anti-mech operations. You can have Bugs roam the countryside seeking targets of opportunity. Is that a caravan of ammo trucks driving down the highway? Well it's a dead caravan now. Bugs create chaos and create discord in your enemy's backfield. You're trying to quickly engage the softest targets you can find.
You know, armed hovercraft from Savannah Master up to Condor, Drillson, and LTV4 (and its fusion powered cousin) can do that too. In some terrain (swamp, marsh, archipelago) even better than 'Mechs. Hovercraft in general are more numerous than light 'Mechs. Of course there are terrain where 'Mechs are better, like Heavy Woods maps. So take a good, long look at the target area, its surroundings, and assemble appropriate strike force accordingly.
That's a good reason for every bug ever to drop half a ton of ammo for a Recon Camera. Know what you're chasing!
Every BattleMech already has sensors for that, and some pack Beagle Active Probe.
-
The Real Ultimate Scout would be an LAM... or for a bit cheaper, a jumping hover (if there were a well-designed one). With Jump of 10 or 12 there isn't much you couldn't handle when it comes to terrain.
-
With Jump of 10 or 12 there isn't much you couldn't handle when it comes to terrain.
Underwater!
-
You know, armed hovercraft from Savannah Master up to Condor, Drillson, and LTV4 (and its fusion powered cousin) can do that too. In some terrain (swamp, marsh, archipelago) even better than 'Mechs. Hovercraft in general are more numerous than light 'Mechs. Of course there are terrain where 'Mechs are better, like Heavy Woods maps. So take a good, long look at the target area, its surroundings, and assemble appropriate strike force accordingly.
Sure, but... ;)
Mechs can do things that vehicles can't. And mechs are less vulnerable to random damage and sneaky crits. If your Wasp gets ambushed by a platoon of infantry, it's probably just going to take some armor damage and then it can jump away. A vehicle has a good chance of being immobilized. At that point it's basically dead. That vulnerability was more pronounced in older rules sets, particularly with how Inferno missiles used to work. While that's been lessened, I think in-universe it's still kinda supposed to work the old way.
As far as things mechs can do, they've got hands and the mobility of a human. A Stinger can rip down power lines, kick out the supports of a bridge, tear up railroad tracks, smash its way into a building, hide underwater, pick up crates of ammo and carry them back to base, etc. Most of these don't really translate into tabletop play, but they're an inherent part of the setting.
-
*snip*
Every BattleMech already has sensors for that, and some pack Beagle Active Probe.
Not in 3025 they don't...
And +1 for Massey's paean to hands! :thumbsup:
-
Lights will always have their place on the battlefield no matter the era. With many having a speed advantage they can dictate the battle better than most heavier units. Mechs like the Locust 5m/6m will get your back when played properly. Some light mechs like the wright can hit well above their weight class.
-
Sure, but... ;)
Mechs can do things that vehicles can't. And mechs are less vulnerable to random damage and sneaky crits. If your Wasp gets ambushed by a platoon of infantry, it's probably just going to take some armor damage and then it can jump away. A vehicle has a good chance of being immobilized. At that point it's basically dead. That vulnerability was more pronounced in older rules sets, particularly with how Inferno missiles used to work. While that's been lessened, I think in-universe it's still kinda supposed to work the old way.
Once you account for head hits, 'Mechs don't have any advantage and may well be worse off. And vehicles are extremely unlikely to be immobilized and given it's weaker armor the Wasp is far more likely to come off badly having the fight infantry. As for Inferano's I think that's more for balance reasons or nostalgia, because once you start thinking about things those lines, you realize that a shut down 'Mech, or maybe one who's maxed out the heat scale, should suffer crits, or maybe cooling system damage.
.
As far as things mechs can do, they've got hands and the mobility of a human. A Stinger can rip down power lines, kick out the supports of a bridge, tear up railroad tracks, smash its way into a building, hide underwater, pick up crates of ammo and carry them back to base, etc. Most of these don't really translate into tabletop play, but they're an inherent part of the setting.
Hands are virtually useless, the max a Lance of Light 'Mechs can carry is 14 tons, and to do THAT you sacrifice all torso and arm mounted weapons, which means unless your Lance is made up off Wasps it no longer has any weapons, so my advice is just to bring some trucks instead.
-
Impressive. Literally every sentence is wrong.
-
Impressive. Literally every sentence is wrong.
Everything I said is accurate. Head hits not only have a 1/36 chance of taking out the 'Mech, which is nominally comparable to that for a vehicle from the front (But not the sides or rear) but due to the way Consciousness Rolls work, futures ones are at worse odds. For Infernos to score crit against vehicles they must presumably burn through the armor, against a completely shut down 'Mech or one with an over-stressed cooling system this would be nasty.
As for hands, every I said there is straight rules and if you've got stuff in you hands and need to fight your way out you have no weapons unless/until you drop whats in your hands, hope you don't get ambushed on your way out!
Side note on head hits, my out of date and presumably erroneous copy of TW says the number of Consciousness Rolls is equal to damage taken, not number of hits, please tell me I'm right about this.
-
Consciousness rolls are now by hits on location or as part of a failed fall roll. With its 9 armor and 3 IS you could conceivably die due to multiple LBX, (L)MG, or SRM hits to the face before the armor fails but that almost never happens (been playing for 5 years only seen it once).
-
Everything I said is accurate.
You say that with confidence, then follow up with:
Side note on head hits, my out of date and presumably erroneous copy of TW says the number of Consciousness Rolls is equal to damage taken, not number of hits, please tell me I'm right about this.
That makes me curious: if you're confused about something basic like that: how often do you play? My assumption is maybe once or twice, total. Just trying to figure out the nature of your apparent knowledge gaps.
OK, sentence by sentence then:
1. Once you account for head hits, 'Mechs don't have any advantage and may well be worse off.
2. And vehicles are extremely unlikely to be immobilized and given it's weaker armor the Wasp is far more likely to come off badly having the fight infantry.
3. As for Inferano's I think that's more for balance reasons or nostalgia, because once you start thinking about things those lines, you realize that a shut down 'Mech, or maybe one who's maxed out the heat scale, should suffer crits, or maybe cooling system damage.
4. Hands are virtually useless, the max a Lance of Light 'Mechs can carry is 14 tons, and to do THAT you sacrifice all torso and arm mounted weapons, which means unless your Lance is made up off Wasps it no longer has any weapons, so my advice is just to bring some trucks instead.
1. No. Head hits only create a (initially, low) chance for a KO, vehicle crits assign significant damage with a roll. Vehicle crits are objectively worse. And easier to get. The first headhit only has a negative result in 1/36 x 1/36 of the events, or 1 in 1296.
2. No, vehicles are very likely to take mobility damage, especially compared to Mechs needing crit rolls to succeed and resolve against actuators or JJs. Especially 20 ton vehicles. Meanwhile, infantry damage output is fairly low, you'd need to trip over a large amount of platoons, or permit them multiple rounds of firing; a Wasp doesn't have to do more than 1.
You'd know that if you'd played with any of those unit types, which makes me wonder if you ever have.
3. But it doesn't until you get about 30 heat, so you're wrong.
4. Closest to being right, but since you can load additional cargo on 1 other Mech of your land beyond what it can hold in its hands, still wrong. Meanwhile, trucks have pretty harsh terrain restrictions compared to Mechs. And its another supply train to keep them in the field. More personnel. Meanwhile 4 Mechs = 4 people.
As for hands, every I said there is straight rules and if you've got stuff in you hands and need to fight your way out you have no weapons unless/until you drop whats in your hands, hope you don't get ambushed on your way out!
Yeah, but your trucks die, Mechs just drop the cargo, and either flee, or deal with the threat and come back for the cargo.
-
Okay, everyone's getting a timeout for a bit while the mods look this over.
-
We're reopening it. Try not to do anything to encourage me to lock the thread again, like getting into contentious personal exchanges. As the moderation staff has already had to lock and review once, we're not going to be lenient if this flares up again.
-
My theory on bug mechs is simple. Sometimes you just need to shoot some villagers.
The Stinger, Wasp, and Locust are low-intensity specialists. Not only that, but they're easily repaired, they can go anywhere, and they're cheap. It doesn't matter what century you're in, you can disperse a riot pretty well with a pair of mech mounted machine guns. They're cheap and plentiful enough that you can release them into your enemy's territory and let them cause havoc. As the kids say, he's in your base, killing your dudes.
And mechs can travel any kind of terrain. A bridge is out? Doesn't matter. Gotta hike through 50 miles of woods to hit the target? No problem. Plus, against lightly armed targets (the kind you expect to encounter in these sorts of missions), mechs are a lot less likely to suffer mobility kills than vehicles. That standard infantry platoon (not some jerk with field guns or some uber-specialist unit) would have to get extremely lucky to damage a mech to the point that it can't withdraw. What that means is that over weeks and months of fighting, your mechs stay in better shape than that all-hovercraft force that your buddy took. Because an immobilized unit is one that has to get left behind, and unless you seize that territory, it's basically destroyed.
Many other light mechs are a response to the bugs. You don't want your enemy's bugs doing that stuff to you, so you buy Jenners and Wolfhounds. Or you want to give your own bug mechs a little more punch, so you buy Commandos and Javelins. Or you're willing to spend a little more to specialize into one area, so you buy Ostscouts and Spiders.
-
Another advantage of light mechs is in providing garrison forces for backwater worlds, they're cheep and plentiful in any era.
-
They also make good trainers as they won't cost as much to repair when they crash.
-
That depends on how fast they're going... ^-^
-
That depends on how fast they're going... ^-^
I suppose but parts from a bug mech are a lot cheaper than those of an assault mech.
-
True, but an assault 'mech is unlikely to lose a limb or core itself in a skid...
-
and then it happens. Slip Crash! Need a new engine or gyro.
-
Honestly, I still don't get the light mechs' advantage as the competitive war machine compared by medium to assault mechs. With the advanced techs, medium encroaches most positions of light, and satellites and the others are already does much recon duty.
Heavy and assault are the different story, for you didn't expect sheer numbers or armor and devastate firepower on lights, but for maneuver and positioning mediums are do much as lights for now, while they are more durable and powerful.
As I said already, our real worlds are no different. At the dawn of tanks, we have seen light tanks, medium tanks and heavy tanks. But most lights are gone to the history(and some armored combat cars are takes its position), mediums are getting heavier and they are merged with heavy tanks and become main battle tank, then main battle tank is getting heavier and resembles heavy tank. Although some odd situations lets to make new 'light' tanks in the current era, but that have similar weight with medium tanks of WWII(around 30t).
I think that battletech universe is all the same. Although they lost a bunch of techs and they waste so many times to develop new techs by harsh era of early Succession Wars, but for Jihad to Dark Age era we have enough capital and technology to make 'medium' mechs as the replacement of old lights. Pulse Laser is the another reason to make lights' life a misery. Worse still, there are VTOLs, which is a rotary wing aircraft(helicopter or sort), that can does as same or even better than a light mech.
So, I think that only way to found the advantage of light mechs is just accept that it is the inferior machine compared by the others. Cost is always considered as an advantage of light, and cheap cost usually means it is not so good by its own. Cheap cost also justifies that it can be used for training mech as above(but not on the real battlefield for standard lights are only useful when it is piloted by experienced mechwarrior).
Only issue that light have an advantage over the others seems it can stand atop of a building and don't collapse it, so Urbanmech may still have a place even on the dark age. But you don't need locust on cityfight if you can afford Urbanmech.
So, I dare to say that, if you have a plenty of resource, then the only useful light battlemech is Urbanmech, nothing more. The rest of them are only useful if you can't afford the other mechs by can't have the others for sale/supplies or don't have enough money. How ironically.
Perhaps, in some weird situation such as special ops, you may consider the other lights. But not on the battlefield, I think.
-
True Mediums are taking over some of the roles lights do but at a cost. Lights are still less expensive and faster though. Plus Satellites can be hacked so they provide as much info to the enemy as they do you. Scouts on the ground though, don't get hacked.
We still do have light tanks though. They just serve a different purpose than the MBT. VTOLs are also vulnerable to Flak.
A Locust is much better against infantry than an Urbanmech. They either have machine guns or just more weapons overall with anti-infantry munitions. They're more complimentary to each other then competitors in urban combat.
The Locust keeps infantry and light units off the Urbanmech's back and the Urbanmech hits the bigger units.
-
In principle I agree that the "best" use of the combat orientated light mech in the modern Battletech setting is as ultra cheap militia units, but I take objection to anyone advocating for the Urbanmech as best at anything. Meme-machine that it is, it is an objectively terrible mech, even within it's specialisation.
However, a low cost, low speed light mech in the 20-30 ton range will set you back about 1.5 million C-bills whilst carrying sufficient armour that it won't just fold up the moment someone looks at it funny and enough weaponry that it can actually achieve something. I recall designing a 25 ton 4/6/4 mover with a large laser, some machine guns and maxed armour. It wasn't a great mech by any means, but it was very cheap and, I would argue, much better at urban combat than the Urbanmech.
Also if you want to go fast, 30-35 tons is still the optimal weight for an XL engined 9/14 mover and you can build viable machines that are even faster - but only with light mechs. Certainly you can build hovers that fast just as easily, but they can't have jump-jets nor operate in a forested or mountainous region, nor underwater, nor in the vacuum of space. VTOLs have similar operational restrictions so the high speed light scout mech still has a role.
-
Light PPC and MML go a long way to making light mechs viable again when they come in.
-
If you make a custom one, then Urbanmech and mediums are also made customs as well. Not so far, Urbanmech UM-R93 is already a good official varient of dark age, which have armor point of a top end medium. And it is also possible to make a bigger(around 55t) custom urbie too, and while it is expensive, it can be durable as much as an Atlas despite it costs around two times higher than an urbie.
Also it is possible to make a Jump 10 medium(a 55 tonner with 275 engine, partial wings and 8 IJJs) if you add custom mechs, and I don't think that lights will have that much jump capability.
Honestly, if lights are allowed to use their exclusive lighter(and smaller!)jumpjets, I don't think that lights are bad so much. I wonder that if 40 tonner or lights(35 tonner or less) can have the jump jets and their Improved Jump Jets with halved weight and critical(so normal jump jets are two on a slot, and IJJ is reduced to 1 slot) lights seems more useful. It doesn't gives the sure protection against pulse but it makes them more possibility. But for now lights requires too much weight and criticals for jump jets if you want it fly, so it is not so good to fully use them as jump mech.
-
In principle I agree that the "best" use of the combat orientated light mech in the modern Battletech setting is as ultra cheap militia units, but I take objection to anyone advocating for the Urbanmech as best at anything. Meme-machine that it is, it is an objectively terrible mech, even within it's specialisation.
However, a low cost, low speed light mech in the 20-30 ton range will set you back about 1.5 million C-bills whilst carrying sufficient armour that it won't just fold up the moment someone looks at it funny and enough weaponry that it can actually achieve something. I recall designing a 25 ton 4/6/4 mover with a large laser, some machine guns and maxed armour. It wasn't a great mech by any means, but it was very cheap and, I would argue, much better at urban combat than the Urbanmech.
What?! :o Blaspheme! The Urbanmech is the best! Urbies Rule! ;D
Also if you want to go fast, 30-35 tons is still the optimal weight for an XL engined 9/14 mover and you can build viable machines that are even faster - but only with light mechs. Certainly you can build hovers that fast just as easily, but they can't have jump-jets nor operate in a forested or mountainous region, nor underwater, nor in the vacuum of space. VTOLs have similar operational restrictions so the high speed light scout mech still has a role.
They can mount vehicular jump jets if you're in the right era.
If you make a custom one, then Urbanmech and mediums are also made customs as well. Not so far, Urbanmech UM-R93 is already a good official varient of dark age, which have armor point of a top end medium. And it is also possible to make a bigger(around 55t) custom urbie too, and while it is expensive, it can be durable as much as an Atlas despite it costs around two times higher than an urbie.
Also it is possible to make a Jump 10 medium(a 55 tonner with 275 engine, partial wings and 8 IJJs) if you add custom mechs, and I don't think that lights will have that much jump capability.
Honestly, if lights are allowed to use their exclusive lighter(and smaller!)jumpjets, I don't think that lights are bad so much. I wonder that if 40 tonner or lights(35 tonner or less) can have the jump jets and their Improved Jump Jets with halved weight and critical(so normal jump jets are two on a slot, and IJJ is reduced to 1 slot) lights seems more useful. It doesn't gives the sure protection against pulse but it makes them more possibility. But for now lights requires too much weight and criticals for jump jets if you want it fly, so it is not so good to fully use them as jump mech.
Actually, a 20 tonner could have a 220 XXL engine and have 11 jump jets.
-
3/5/3 (or even 3/5/5) Urbanmechs are still quite cheap. A small engine and 1-ton gyro go a long way toward keeping the price down.
-
Arguably slower light mechs can be quite useful on the battlefield as well. You just need to put the in roles where they're not the most important target.
Canon example is the Battle Hawk. One of the cheapest ways possible to keep backstabbers and BA honest. Sure it's pretty easy to kill, but where are you going to focus your fire - the Battle Hawk doing nothing or the Thunder Hawk next to it throwing gauss slugs at you?
Another is light fire support. So what if the light mech throwing 15 LRMs is made of tinfoil, the Berzerker is only two turns away! :D
-
For our purposes here, the most basic unit in the game is not the Battlemech. It's the foot infantry rifle squad. You've got seven dudes holding guns, and that's about it. That unit hasn't really changed in the last 1000 years. There are too many inherent limitations to the platform.
Even in the world of Battletech, you're going to have a lot of jobs that just require an infantry squad. Not a tricked out, ultra-heavy armor with cybernetic enhancements squad carrying blazer rifles with underslung grenade launchers. Just regular dudes with a helmet, a uniform, and an AK-47 knockoff. Most of your manpower will be soldiers fresh out of boot camp with little to no fighting experience. But that's okay, all you need them to do is grunt work. Unload crates off of ammo trucks. Stand guard at a gate and check people's IDs. Drive a couple of fuel trucks down the road. Go to this location on the map, and radio us if something kills you.
This is where the bug mechs live. You don't need a 45 ton mech with an XL engine and all the latest doo-dads to kill some infantry squads. It's a waste of resources. Use a Stinger for that. Light mechs are all about achieving local superiority for as little cost as possible. You know what a convoy of trucks can't handle at all? A Locust that somehow slipped past your main force. Would a 55 ton Wraith be better? Yeah it's certainly fast enough to do the job, but it also costs 8 times as much. What will cause more havoc on your opponent's supply lines, a single Wraith or 8 Locusts?
Now on the tabletop, that's not really fun to play. I get that. One guy gets a Locust and the other gets a bunch of J-27 Ordnance Transports, and maybe a platoon or two of mechanized infantry to protect them. That's a very boring, one-sided game (I've done it in megamek and there's absolutely no drama to it). But strategically, it's exactly what you'd do. In a Mechwarrior campaign, playing the harasser who picks off defenseless enemies one by one might be fun. But overall, if your Stinger ends up on the same mapsheet as your opponent's Berserker, you've done something really wrong.
-
The funny thing is, the way they cost those troops makes the squad come in around 125K, even with bog standard Auto-Rifles. For about 5K more, they can all have second chance vests (Ballistic Plate Vest, which is non-encumbering and gives you an Armor divisor of 2), radios (6 Military Comms and 1 Field Comm), and one set of binoculars for the squad leader.
-
The field comm should probably be standard. As far as the rest, I doubt it.
If you knew that your infantry squads were going to get shot at by a mech-scale machine gun (and if you care about them surviving), then yeah you'd probably want to give them ballistic plate vests. But there's a reason a lot of armies in the real world don't bother with that.
You can't just equip the guys who happen to get attacked by the mech. You have to equip everybody then. Are you gonna pay so the dude at the checkpoint who says "Papers, please." has a ballistic plate vest? What if he never gets killed? Then you've wasted money. :D
The point is, you can't really fortify everything. Yeah, give your anti-battlemech trained SWAT team stormtroopers all the best gear. You know they're gonna be going into dangerous situations. I mean, it'll maybe keep them alive one more turn against those mech machine guns, and that might make a difference. But you probably don't have the resources to do that for everybody.
-
Ballistic Plate Vests are only 600 C-Bills each. Davion and Steiner armor Jackets are even cheaper, and also provide a non-encumbering Divisor of 2. Compare to the cost of SAPI plates issued to everybody going to the land of sand. More relevantly, compare to the nearly 18K cost of the bog standard Auto-Rifle trooper. That's about 3% of the cost to double the trooper's life expectancy. That's worth it in my book.
Wrenching this back on topic, a typical bug 'mech is about 1.6M C-Bills. So you're looking at around 12 squads per 'mech.
-
Well, then why not to try some battle armor or cheap combat vehicle? I think that these would be alternative choice for where light mechs are fit.
Anyway, it seems too difficult to bring lights the same battlefield with medium to assault mechs and most combat vehicles.
-
Ballistic Plate Vests are only 600 C-Bills each. Davion and Steiner armor Jackets are even cheaper, and also provide a non-encumbering Divisor of 2. Compare to the cost of SAPI plates issued to everybody going to the land of sand. More relevantly, compare to the nearly 18K cost of the bog standard Auto-Rifle trooper. That's about 3% of the cost to double the trooper's life expectancy. That's worth it in my book.
Except that most of the people you are equipping with that stuff never see combat. Don't think of it in terms of the units you are putting on a game board. Think of it in terms of how many foot soldiers you'll need on a continent. That's an extra 3% cost across the board, and 99% of those people are not going to be involved in combat at all.
You also aren't doubling their life expectancy. A guy hit with a medium laser is still dead. A guy hit with artillery is still dead. A guy in a burning woods hex is still dead. A guy in a collapsing building is still dead.
Wrenching this back on topic, a typical bug 'mech is about 1.6M C-Bills. So you're looking at around 12 squads per 'mech.
That's 3 platoons. I think a Locust can do that no problem.
-
I never had the opportunity to shoot back, but was certainly glad to have those plates when I was shot AT on more than one occasion. Still worth it in my book. And the cost drops a little when you consider the bog standard trooper has at least a Flak Vest (50 C-bills). Truly unarmored troops would have a Divisor of 0.5. Since standard troops have a 1 Divisor, they're wearing SOME kind of armor.
A guy in a hex hosed down with a 'mech Machine Gun (of which the aforementioned Locust has TWO, as does the Stinger) certainly doubles his life expectancy. 4d6 of AI damage will likely annihilate a typically armored squad (the Medium Laser gets exactly ONE trooper). Against a squad with Ballistic Plate vests, enough could survive to still be a (minor) threat. The odds change if we're talking a whole platoon.
-
I would also consider 600 C-Bills a person worth it to get the increase in morale and experience from less people dying brutally because a Stinger walked into a transport caravan
-
I hate to bring 'reality' into BattleTech, but psychologically speaking, it's proven that despite the efficacy of heavier armours on infantry the bulk and weight of the stuff has an enormous deleterious effect on morale. So much so in fact that the two relatively modern armies that I know tried to issue such as standard kit for all troopers found their combat effectiveness significantly curtailed.
What this means is that people in general find being given and told to maintain that kind of stuff when they 'know' they won't be using it aggravating and that aggravation leads to poor maintenance and a lot of griping and loss of efficiency in other duties.
That said, experienced personel who have had to use the stuff and seen it help gripe a lot less. However that still causes morale issues as the experienced and inexperienced come into conflict.
So, yes, for frontline troops who are expected to be on the battlefield this stuff is a near mandatory godsend. For the guys manning the rear areas and doing police duty and so on, it's actively detrimental to operations.
However this is evidence from the real world and definitely doesn't take into account the effects of whatever astounding psycho-conditioning and superman-drug physical conditioning is part of BattleTech infantry training.
That all said: What does the cost efficiency of infantry armour have to do with the use of light 'mechs against heavier 'mechs on 2-6 sheets of A4 paper?
-
In the case of the Lyran armor jacket, the difference from the generic Flak vest is literally less than one pound (0.7 kg). It's a bit more for Davion, and more yet for the generic Ballistic Plate vest. Compared to the real world SAPI plates I personally have experienced, those differences are trivial.
And as far as light 'mechs vs. heavier ones, that's also only a part of the topic. I think light 'mechs vs. infantry is certainly within bounds.
-
That all said: What does the cost efficiency of infantry armour have to do with the use of light 'mechs against heavier 'mechs on 2-6 sheets of A4 paper?
If you just want to fight in a phone booth? Then take assault mechs and be done with it. Light mechs become far more effective when you've got scenario rules in place. You've gotta pretend that the game you're playing is part of a larger war.
Suppose you're playing a game where your forces must cross a river. At its narrowest point, the river is 3 hexes wide. It is fast flowing and in order to cross it, you have to jump over it. The nearest mech-scale bridge is 30 miles away. As a result, you and your opponent agree that all mechs involved in this battle have to have a minimum of 4 jump MP. That's going to dramatically affect force selection. Leave those Atlases and Awesomes at home, because they can't cross the river.
A lot of mechs shine when the scenario rules are in their favor. It's just that a lot of the time, those rules are "here are two mapsheets, go blow each other up". That's something where the scenario is in favor of the assault mech.
-
Well, then why not to try some battle armor or cheap combat vehicle? I think that these would be alternative choice for where light mechs are fit.
Anyway, it seems too difficult to bring lights the same battlefield with medium to assault mechs and most combat vehicles.
BA isn't always available nor do they have the speed or mobility of a bug mech. Combat vehicles are limited by terrain.
It's just as easy if not easier to bring light mechs as it is to bring other unit types.
-
...
So, yes, for frontline troops who are expected to be on the battlefield this stuff is a near mandatory godsend. For the guys manning the rear areas and doing police duty and so on, it's actively detrimental to operations.
However this is evidence from the real world and definitely doesn't take into account the effects of whatever astounding psycho-conditioning and superman-drug physical conditioning is part of BattleTech infantry training.
...
Was thinking more along the lines of the possibility of encountering Mechs as your opponent ... just knowing that Mechs are common raid unit might convince me to wear my armor.
Especially light Mechs as they can race in, jump in, whatever relatively quickly ... knowing that if enough of your unit can return fire, there is a good chance of inflicting decent damage. Not wearing armor (and a .5 divisor :-X ) means your unit is going to get wiped out with very little chance of anyone surviving.
-
I've always seen movement as the defining feature of a mech's role. The reason for light mechs is to move faster than anything heavier can and effectively mount more payload. For me that means getting 7/11 and 8/12 movement profiles are the reason to field a light in the SW era. Once the Clans comes along, if you're not moving 9/14 or faster, why not be medium instead?
That's how I see it, too. But there sure are a lot of 7/11-or-less light 'Mechs out there.
Is this thread just the old debate over classic 4/6 trooper mediums, updated for the XL era? If you can't resist comparing your 'Mech to a half-again-its-weight 'Mech that has the same speed and sits nearer the optimum of the engine rating/weight curve then, yeah, it'll look bad.
-
Except that most of the people you are equipping with that stuff never see combat. Don't think of it in terms of the units you are putting on a game board. Think of it in terms of how many foot soldiers you'll need on a continent. That's an extra 3% cost across the board, and 99% of those people are not going to be involved in combat at all.
Even from a purely utilitarian standpoint, I think Daryk has the right of it.
That 3% cost increase "across the board" is only across conventional infantry units, which is a vanishingly small proportion of capital cost (fixed, one-time expenses; you don't need to pay flak suits a salary.). In a world of Battlemechs and Jump-capable Warships, those suits aren't going to make a very big blip, even if you distribute them to every single infantryman. The Army's the cheapest military branch for a reason. (Assuming 99% are not going to be involved in combat is speculation. IIRC, the IRL figure is 10% of soldiers actually seeing combat in the states, so if BT sees anything close to their real-life equivalents your estimate is off by a factor of 10.)
What's being missed here is avoided costs: what wearing the advanced armors means you don't have to pay. If your soldier survives getting shot with his advanced armor when he would have otherwise died, you avoid having to spend several thousands of C-Bills in benefits to the soldier's family, and you don't have to pay several thousands of C-Bills on training the dead soldier's replacement. The dead soldier also won't retire and generate economic activity in the private sector, adding to your interstellar empire's wealth for buying more defensive equipment in the future. That armor doesn't actually have to shift the tide of any battles or wars for the implementing faction to reap benefits.
In a way, the improved armor is not a cost, they're an investment. An investment which, all things considered, costs mere pennies to enact.
Now, you don't really need to equip the techs and the astechs and the top brass wargaming in the Strategy Room on New Avalon. Front line and second-line troops though? You bet. I'd even throw garrisons in there. I'd bet most places could make the advanced infantry-scale armors local, and that'd cut down loads on shipping costs.
That's 3 platoons. I think a Locust can do that no problem.
Depends on the platoon. Bog-standard auto-rifles, sure. Heavy LRM foot infantry or well-equipped jump infantry? Eh, best keep your distance unless you need to... Stone's Trackers? Locust better run home with its tail between its legs.
-
It's best to not look at cost in BT in any conversation where you try to compare things. It's been broken since day 1, and actively damages everything it touches.
Instead, phrase cost arguments along the lines of aesthetic truths:
- Bigger engines and gyros in Mechs are more expensive
- Armoring infantry is more expensive than not armoring them
Don't look at actual numbers.
-
How else do you discuss the orders of magnitude of difference between those two aesthetic truths? ???
-
The problem with BT as a game and how most people play is that it distorts how it would be if it were a real universe.
In BT games most people are playing mech vs mech only. Why? Because the intro rules have always focused upon mechs to the point that it omits vehicles and infantry. It distorts the view of the player that all actions are going to be conducted with mechs who will face defending mechs. I have played with people who wanted "mech only games" and some that struggled with the concept of infantry and battle armor. Call it "Fasanomics" or whatever you will, but most fights are not going to be mech vs mech, but mech vs conventional forces , and even conventional vs conventional.
With TW the rules changed that improved vehicles and infantry to something that is far more "realistic" since a platoon of infantry are not going to line up so that your large laser could kill up to 16 of them at once. Vehicle armor is no longer some kind of very tough paper mache that is easily set ablaze and destroyed with a single inferno. While conventional forces got tougher, light mechs still have an advantage over most conventional units around it's own tonnage, which is speed, maneuverability, and its ability to survive.
Lights can lose their arms and even side torsos and keep fighting, jumping, and running. Vehicles cannot, and to make things worse a single point of damage can easily cripple a unit's ability to move. In my last game I had 2 Zhukovs turned into rocks after being sprayed by LBX2s. In return, I turned their Demolisher A4 variants into fireballs as I roasted them with inferno SRMs. I really wish Megamek had a graphic for 400points of damage from ammo being detonated. This is another issue that light mechs do not need to worry about.
While lights are not as strong as an assault mech there is a very good reason to go with light mechs, which is that assaults are rare, but conventional forces are abundant. You don't need the lights to destroy opposing assault mechs, although I've made it a point in my time in this game to do so, they just need to be capable of destroying conventionals that it is able to catch. If it cannot take on a conventional force then it should be more then capable of outrunning it. Perhaps the Urbie cannot, but the Panther can.
The Battletech universe is likely filled with factories that are going to be able to pump out Hetzers, APCs, and rifles, but few that are capable of producing mechs. This means that the defense of most worlds will fall upon conventional forces. There are far more high schools churning out potential infantry then there are academies for shaping them into mechwarriors, assuming that they have what it takes. A single light mech is going to be a terror on most worlds or at least hard to catch. Lets not forget that opposing forces are not the target, but merely the defenders trying to keep lights from destroying critical structures or VIPs. Light mechs in most BT games are unfortunately not going to shine as brightly as they could in a larger scale environment.
-
Actually, a 20 tonner could have a 220 XXL engine and have 11 jump jets.
We already have a 'Mech with 11 jump jets.
-
It's best to not look at cost in BT in any conversation where you try to compare things. It's been broken since day 1, and actively damages everything it touches.
Instead, phrase cost arguments along the lines of aesthetic truths:
- Bigger engines and gyros in Mechs are more expensive
- Armoring infantry is more expensive than not armoring them
Don't look at actual numbers.
I agree with this. Yes, the actual numbers break down gives you a much different (more accurate?) perspective. But, there needs to be a cut off of how far down the Account-tech path one is willing to go.
That path only leads to pain and suffering ... and huge frackin' headaches! It's a Trap!
-
I wasn't referring to exact numbers or estimates, more to the more general idea that the House militaries don't exist in a vacuum and that dead men generate less revenue than working men.
As for costs being broken, that wouldn't be difficult to fix, but BT moves pretty slowly and rarely seems to change or retcon anything equipment-wise, so it won't change and the "C-Bills sucks" meme will likely continue on forever...
-
How else do you discuss the orders of magnitude of difference between those two aesthetic truths? ???
You mean how much more expensive it is to give every soldier on the planet a bunch of equipment, rather than buying a couple of mechs? :D
As Battletech fans, we have a dilemma. The fiction tells us that light mechs are super common. The game rules tell us that medium mechs can do a light's job better (especially with advanced tech). So how do we justify this to ourselves? We can either decide that we are much smarter than the dumb people in the Battletech universe, or we can say that there's some other factor at work. Somewhere, somehow, there's a reason that we didn't consider, and once you put that in the equation light mechs suddenly make sense again.
I choose to go with the latter explanation. As I see it, light mechs must hit a sweet spot for them to be so common. Even before the Succession Wars, nations that had a choice in what to build decided to devote lots of resources to creating light mechs. So they have to be good for something, and that something has to be relatively common. The easiest explanation I could come up with is that they are meant to slaughter conventional forces.
-
How else do you discuss the orders of magnitude of difference between those two aesthetic truths? ???
You dont. If you're wise.
-
You dont. If you're wise.
Yes, but what about us? :)
-
Yes, but what about us? :)
Ah. Proceed.
But Ill offer this nugget, which I suggested as a way to help clean up the mess.
All the pricing info that has ever been printed only reflects what IS mercenaries have to pay for stuff. It doesnt reflect House costs at all. Or Clan costs.
-
Right, so the Houses get the lowest bidders, and the clans get the "build this or I will beat you within an inch of your life" laborer caste... ::)
-
I am not sure 'modern' lights have embraced the design choices needed to re-define their tactical niche.
Post 3130 to re-establish Lights and their scout/interceptor roles I think they need to embrace some of the latest technologies that are harder for their larger brothers to use. Light mechs historically have plenty of crits with little warload. But if they start being designed with things like XL Gyros, lighter internal structure even if its less damage resistant, and even XXL engines . . . they you trade their typical surplus of spare crits to get a bit more warload. Mechs like the Havoc (great mech, bit too slow now) or better the Wulfen & Gunsmith are the design paradigm that should be moved too . . . heck, maybe even reflective armor since energy weapons (ERPPC & Clan Pulse) are the bigger threat to speedsters.
-
I am not sure 'modern' lights have embraced the design choices needed to re-define their tactical niche.
Post 3130 to re-establish Lights and their scout/interceptor roles I think they need to embrace some of the latest technologies that are harder for their larger brothers to use. Light mechs historically have plenty of crits with little warload. But if they start being designed with things like XL Gyros, lighter internal structure even if its less damage resistant, and even XXL engines . . . they you trade their typical surplus of spare crits to get a bit more warload. Mechs like the Havoc (great mech, bit too slow now) or better the Wulfen & Gunsmith are the design paradigm that should be moved too . . . heck, maybe even reflective armor since energy weapons (ERPPC & Clan Pulse) are the bigger threat to speedsters.
You ever see a Reflec armored light get smashed by a direct-fire LTC?
-
LTCs are literally MADE of awesome... 8)
-
You ever see a Reflec armored light get smashed by a direct-fire LTC?
Sure, and that is the counter in the game of Rock/Paper/Scissors/Lizard/Spock of BT weapons . . . but the LTC is a LOT less common than ERPPCs, Snubs, ERLL and Clan Pulse which people would shoot at them even if the numbers are high. With their limited range, you can leave the LTC bubble and go hit something else that will be vulnerable.
Not putting Reflec armor on something because of LTCs is like deciding not to take Elementals because someone might take a Plasma Rifle. You plan around it, and the Plasma is a LOT more common.
-
During the succession wars we're given the ratio of 30% lights, 40% mediums. Under that proportion fighting lights (as opposed to bugs) have no business dealing with heavies, but can be expected to mess with mediums. IMHO, that is reasonable.
We're not given proportions for later eras, but extrapolating from the RATs near the back of total warfare have things skewing significantly towards heavy (but not assault.) Combine that with accuracy boosts like pulse lasers, tarcomps, beagle probes and precision ammo, and lights become far less survivable. I'll not say unsurvivable, but they need either range or speed boosts over their predecessors.
-
Not putting Reflec armor on something because of LTCs is like deciding not to take Elementals because someone might take a Plasma Rifle. You plan around it, and the Plasma is a LOT more common.
FWIW, we've found the Elementals do tend to get shelved pretty quick once the LTCs start finding their way on the board.
-
Heh... Pure AWESOME! :D
-
LTC?
-
LTC?
Long Tom Cannon. Snub-barrelled artillery piece.
See Hel B, among other spots.
-
Long Tom Cannon, aka the Long Tom Artillery Cannon (LTAC)… a ridiculously heavy 3025-era area of effect weapon. Basically, a cut down artillery piece used in direct fire mode.
Ninja'd by Greatclub...
-
Ah. Was not familiar with that abbreviation.
-
We already have a 'Mech with 11 jump jets.
Cool! What is it and where can i find it?
-
spider 8xr
spider 8x
Wraith alexander.
incubus II
none of them actually jump 11 or 12, they need partial wings to help.
correction, none of them actually jump that far, but it's doable. just not currently canon that I can find.
-
Well, can't we just use VTOLs even now? They can still moves far faster, with much armor and also allowed to carry some infatries or battle armor. Just for raiding supply route, I don't think that it is bad that much compared by light mech. VTOLs are susceptible to flank more than light mechs, but are your 'infantry escort' have any real idea to against VTOL if they lacks any solution even against light battlemech and just slaughtered by them?
Actually such 'flank' weapons are also deadly and quite effective against light mechs, even if the enemy had that.
Also VTOL is a 20th century tech, not 25th, means it is far easy to access for VTOLs, and if you want to cost down and run in mass, they can run by ICE rather than fusion. For one proper war machine, I'd pick a fusion fueled VTOL, but if you think the advantage of light is cheap one, then I have to point out that VTOL is far cheaper. A warrior costs around 1/3 of a locust, and its BV is only 2/3 of a locust as well.
Perhaps, the only advantage of mech is their hands to carry looted goods easily, but not all mechs are possess two hands.
-
spider 8xr
spider 8x
Wraith alexander.
incubus II
none of them actually jump 11 or 12, they need partial wings to help.
correction, none of them actually jump that far, but it's doable. just not currently canon that I can find.
Cool. Thanks. :thumbsup: I don't remember one but that doesn't mean there isn't one. It is doable though.
Well, can't we just use VTOLs even now? They can still moves far faster, with much armor and also allowed to carry some infatries or battle armor. Just for raiding supply route, I don't think that it is bad that much compared by light mech. VTOLs are susceptible to flank more than light mechs, but are your 'infantry escort' have any real idea to against VTOL if they lacks any solution even against light battlemech and just slaughtered by them?
Actually such 'flank' weapons are also deadly and quite effective against light mechs, even if the enemy had that.
Also VTOL is a 20th century tech, not 25th, means it is far easy to access for VTOLs, and if you want to cost down and run in mass, they can run by ICE rather than fusion. For one proper war machine, I'd pick a fusion fueled VTOL, but if you think the advantage of light is cheap one, then I have to point out that VTOL is far cheaper. A warrior costs around 1/3 of a locust, and its BV is only 2/3 of a locust as well.
Perhaps, the only advantage of mech is their hands to carry looted goods easily, but not all mechs are possess two hands.
Yes you can use VTOLs. Many do because they're cheaper and can possibly move faster than mechs. They're not a perfect replacement though. Last time I looked VTOLs couldn't be combat dropped. You had to land the dropship and unload the VTOL before it could fly.
VTOLs are also more vulnerable to Flak than Mechs. The rounds do half damage against Mechs. Although AirMechs get full damage when flying but they're more survivable than VTOLs.
-
Are they really needs to be combat dropped? I think that they can be launched on midair and fly by their own.
Also, just for combat drop, I'd rather dropping mediums, for either light or medium costs one battlemech bay. Lights' fast speed is mitigated if you can issue a combat drop then retrieve them.
-
Cool! What is it and where can i find it?
Here. (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/110086/BattleTech-Experimental-Technical-Readout-Boondoggles?term=boond)
-
Well, can't we just use VTOLs even now? They can still moves far faster, with much armor and also allowed to carry some infatries or battle armor. Just for raiding supply route, I don't think that it is bad that much compared by light mech. VTOLs are susceptible to flank more than light mechs, but are your 'infantry escort' have any real idea to against VTOL if they lacks any solution even against light battlemech and just slaughtered by them?
Actually such 'flank' weapons are also deadly and quite effective against light mechs, even if the enemy had that.
Also VTOL is a 20th century tech, not 25th, means it is far easy to access for VTOLs, and if you want to cost down and run in mass, they can run by ICE rather than fusion. For one proper war machine, I'd pick a fusion fueled VTOL, but if you think the advantage of light is cheap one, then I have to point out that VTOL is far cheaper. A warrior costs around 1/3 of a locust, and its BV is only 2/3 of a locust as well.
Perhaps, the only advantage of mech is their hands to carry looted goods easily, but not all mechs are possess two hands.
In the older rules, vehicles were incredibly vulnerable. Even light mechs were much more survivable than basically any vehicle. With Total Warfare, that changed. While vehicles get immobilized fairly easily, they're a lot harder to instant kill. We don't know which of these rules sets are more representative of the "true" nature of the game world.
Regardless, vehicles are still a lot more vulnerable to the occasional lucky shot. One guy with an SRM launcher is virtually no threat to a Battlemech. Yes, technically he could get a head hit or a through-armor critical, but he's much more likely to get a lucky shot like that against a vehicle than a mech. We don't know how prevalent Jerks with SRMs are (i.e., lone snipers or small squads who take potshots from hidden locations), but they're a real threat over the long term against VTOLs.
Obviously, militaries in Battletech use both VTOLs and light mechs, so there's a value to each. As I said earlier, we don't know exactly what calculation led to armies using light mechs. We just know that every army does, so there's probably a reason for it.
-
Well, can't we just use VTOLs even now? They can still moves far faster, with much armor and also allowed to carry some infatries or battle armor. Just for raiding supply route, I don't think that it is bad that much compared by light mech. VTOLs are susceptible to flank more than light mechs, but are your 'infantry escort' have any real idea to against VTOL if they lacks any solution even against light battlemech and just slaughtered by them?
Actually such 'flank' weapons are also deadly and quite effective against light mechs, even if the enemy had that.
Also VTOL is a 20th century tech, not 25th, means it is far easy to access for VTOLs, and if you want to cost down and run in mass, they can run by ICE rather than fusion. For one proper war machine, I'd pick a fusion fueled VTOL, but if you think the advantage of light is cheap one, then I have to point out that VTOL is far cheaper. A warrior costs around 1/3 of a locust, and its BV is only 2/3 of a locust as well.
Perhaps, the only advantage of mech is their hands to carry looted goods easily, but not all mechs are possess two hands.
A single Vedette or Scorpion equipped with flak ammo is a significant threat to most VTOLs whereas it's just a nuisance to the average light mech. Vedettes and Scorpions are exactly the kind of thing you would expect to be escorting a convoy.
-
VTOLs are far more vulnerable to bad weather than mechs, with a bad storm easily capable of forcing them to return to base. Even the lightest mechs can soldier on through almost anything, and can simply hunker down in place through the worse stuff. It takes disaster-level conditions to actually prevent a mech from operating at all.
Similarly, as mentioned before in this very thread, vehicles like VTOLs stand a very good chance of taking heavy damage or being outright crippled if they take an ambush salvo from even a single infantry platoon. Infantry try that against even a bug mech, they might scratch the armor to hell, but barring a truly lucky head hit or TAC, that mech WILL survive to evade, return fire, and call in the contact.
-
You also have two different types of recon, though both get thrown around and sometimes folks mash them together in the same answer.
General recon . . . we know the DS landed over that way in the mountain chain. They could have (and most likely did) have a last minute alteration of their trajectory to hide their actual landing zone. Send out the strategic recon assets to see where they might have landed . . . this means sats are re-tasked, you send out the Boomerang or clones in grid searchs to look for initial signs, VTOLs in search grids, or dispatch wheeled transports to roadside vantage points.
Results- Boomerang 12 is missed the 1500 radio check in and did not RTB, Kestrel 11 picked up a thermal signature on its Ferret's sensor 10 klicks off X position which could be a landed DS in that valley, and Rover 4 thought they spotted some smoke from Table Top Point on the M4.
Interception force is mustered and heads towards the mountains . . . depending on what paths come out of the mountain or how good the fixes are- or what assets are available- you send out the scouts. Lighter/smaller/less combat capable mechs are going to be sent on the furthest out tasks, your more combat capable lights and faster meds (aka scout killers) are going to be your screening elements. The screen is to prevent your movement formation from running into a ambush or trap while killing or driving off any enemy scouts who are trying to find your formation and determine your specific forces. Your scouts are going to check the most likely approaches, try to find the enemy axis of advance, their DZ and get specifics- its better to plan your fights knowing the enemy has a pair of Longbows and a lance of Archers than saying they have at least two assaults & four heavies.
Pushing for the detailed information, you are going to draw fire . . . you need to be able to survive that fire, which is why mechs are better as scouts trying to get that detailed information.
BUT proper doctrine means that its not a single scout out there alone . . . a pair works an area rather than a singleton. With a pair, its a LOT harder to kill two units at the same time to stop a report from getting out (such as the general recon example of a missing Boomerang) . . . if you put out singletons you can get false data points (no radio link for 10 minutes b/c a bad reception zone) where the usual sign a singleton runs into the enemy is a absence of data. So a pair of VTOLs, pair of scout vehicles, or infantry/BA squad are the proper tactical element (see bounding overwatch) to conduct scouting operations because the redundancy of observers is on par with the survivability of mechs.
Another concept which gets referenced or insinuated though is the Recon in Force. When you absolutely need to know what is coming your way- to plan your defensive line/positions or to find out what is on the defensive line- you dispatch a recon in force. You already know where they are, general scouting has revealed this information but you need specifics. For this force you pick the fastest & most survivable designs to rush in, get shot at and rush out- with the most important part being the ability to penetrate the screen and get the message out. For me, this role is not Bugs . . . this is Jenners, Spiders, Venoms, Ostscouts, and others with that profile, maybe led by a Phoenix Hawk or similar. Recon in force is also a mission attacking units are more likely to need . . . defenders can seed infantry LPOPs along the attacker's axis of advance to get nearly the same information at much less of a cost.
So IMO, it all comes down to what type of scouting you are talking about . . . and if you are a offensive or defensive unit in the House's military.
-
Are they really needs to be combat dropped? I think that they can be launched on midair and fly by their own.
Also, just for combat drop, I'd rather dropping mediums, for either light or medium costs one battlemech bay. Lights' fast speed is mitigated if you can issue a combat drop then retrieve them.
VTOLs can't expend MP to enter or leave a dropship. They have to be loaded or unloaded. That means landing the dropship putting it at risk from enemy units twice. Once to unload and once to load. Mechs can be dropped so the dropship is only at risk picking them up.
Here. (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/110086/BattleTech-Experimental-Technical-Readout-Boondoggles?term=boond)
Ah! The Ostscout IIC! Thanks! :thumbsup:
-
VTOLs can't expend MP to enter or leave a dropship. They have to be loaded or unloaded. That means landing the dropship putting it at risk from enemy units twice. Once to unload and once to load. Mechs can be dropped so the dropship is only at risk picking them up.
In a vehicle cubicle . . . I want to say it was determined that they can be like ASF in Small Craft cubicles- aka you can load a VTOL in and launch it from a ASF cubicle. I do not recall if that ruling made them recoverable the same way.
It was also done in fiction IIRC, the 1st Steel Wolf attack on Archenar had VTOLs launched from the DS along with the ASF before it landed.
-
I would probably require a god-like piloting roll to recover a VTOL that way...
Launching, somewhat less...
-
I would probably require a god-like piloting roll to recover a VTOL that way...
Launching, somewhat less...
Victor rides a VTOL out of a dropship just like this in the third Blood of Kerensky Novel, just so he can get home a bit sooner.
-
I would probably require a god-like piloting roll to recover a VTOL that way...
Launching, somewhat less...
Lol, depends on how it gets Vertical . . . vectored thrust? Ok . . . whirling blades of decapitation? do we have clearance?
-
Dropping mechs on dropship is not orbital drop so it is nothing wrong to launch VTOLs from flying dropships.
-
One thing that's usually ignored when discussing this topic is that the border between the "light" and "medium" weight classes is somewhat arbitrary and doesn't really reflect the capabilities of the 'Mechs on either side of that border.
A 35-ton 'Mech can be quite a robust combat machine that doesn't go down easily, even in 3050+. Think of an Adder, Wolfhound or Jenner 7F. 35 tons is the optimum weight for an 8/12 movement profile with a light engine. That's a very useful speed, and you can still fit a lot of armor and weaponry on a 'Mech that size. Your 10 free heat sinks go a lot farther ton-for-ton, and there's no trouble fitting both ES and FF on the same chassis. 35-40 tons is a nice sweet spot for very fast, hard-hitting combat 'Mechs.
30 tons or less is when a 'Mech starts to become more of a death trap; I would never bring anything 20-25 tons to the modern battlefield except for a suicide mission (which can be fine for a Piranha or something similar).
-
In a vehicle cubicle . . . I want to say it was determined that they can be like ASF in Small Craft cubicles- aka you can load a VTOL in and launch it from a ASF cubicle. I do not recall if that ruling made them recoverable the same way.
It was also done in fiction IIRC, the 1st Steel Wolf attack on Archenar had VTOLs launched from the DS along with the ASF before it landed.
There might be an errata but I'm not finding the rule allowing VTOLs to launch from dropships. :(
-
There might be an errata but I'm not finding the rule allowing VTOLs to launch from dropships. :(
stratops p 22
(I have the weirdest memory. Wish it worked as well for practical things)
-
During the succession wars we're given the ratio of 30% lights, 40% mediums. Under that proportion fighting lights (as opposed to bugs) have no business dealing with heavies, but can be expected to mess with mediums. IMHO, that is reasonable.
We're not given proportions for later eras, but extrapolating from the RATs near the back of total warfare have things skewing significantly towards heavy (but not assault.) Combine that with accuracy boosts like pulse lasers, tarcomps, beagle probes and precision ammo, and lights become far less survivable. I'll not say unsurvivable, but they need either range or speed boosts over their predecessors.
I think that the ratios of the various sizes to each other has to change in later eras . . . if the factors driving those ratios are truly need-based. It has been clearly pointed out in this thread that there is always a place for a unit that trades off both weapons and armor for speed. The problem light Mechs have is that they are facing more pressure from other units when it comes to fulfilling those types of roles.
Advanced tech allows the medium Mech to achieve very high speeds without having to trade out as much armor or firepower. This change is occurring at the same time that speed becomes less valuable as a tactical defense (pulse lasers, etc.) even while it retains its value on a larger operation or strategic level, making that extra armor on the mediums all the more valuable. The only tradeoff vs. a light in this case is cost (more materials, bigger engine, etc.).
If cost *is* a factor, then you have to start looking at faster vehicles since they are usually even cheaper than light Mechs. A light Mech is still a bit more durable than these units, but not as much as it used to be . . . not so much because of advanced tech, but because of the rules changes that accompanied the advanced tech as it was introduced IRL. Total Warfare (and MaxTech before it) made vehicles more durable. This makes them last longer on the battlefield but this does mean that they are putting more "pressure" on Mechs when it comes to filling certain roles. This is especially true of VTOLs, which now carry their own partial cover with them in the form of rotors (and can launch out of Dropships too??).
Light Mechs occupy a window between costlier mediums and the cheaper vehicles . . . that window is just a fair bit smaller than it was during the pre-TW Succession Wars days, so IMO they probably shouldn't be 30% of an RAT anymore.
[Edit for a couple of spelling errors]
-
*snip*
Light Mechs occupy a window between costlier mediums and the cheaper vehicles . . . that window is just a fair bit smaller than it was during the pre-TW Succession Wars days, so IMO they probably shouldn't be 30% of an RAT anymore.
*snip*
I think you just identified why I prefer 3025 over all other eras... THANK YOU! :thumbsup:
-
One thing that's usually ignored when discussing this topic is that the border between the "light" and "medium" weight classes is somewhat arbitrary and doesn't really reflect the capabilities of the 'Mechs on either side of that border.
A 35-ton 'Mech can be quite a robust combat machine that doesn't go down easily, even in 3050+. Think of an Adder, Wolfhound or Jenner 7F. 35 tons is the optimum weight for an 8/12 movement profile with a light engine. That's a very useful speed, and you can still fit a lot of armor and weaponry on a 'Mech that size. Your 10 free heat sinks go a lot farther ton-for-ton, and there's no trouble fitting both ES and FF on the same chassis. 35-40 tons is a nice sweet spot for very fast, hard-hitting combat 'Mechs.
30 tons or less is when a 'Mech starts to become more of a death trap; I would never bring anything 20-25 tons to the modern battlefield except for a suicide mission (which can be fine for a Piranha or something similar).
Yeah. A 35 tons 'light' mechs' weight is 175% of a 20 tons mech. It is almost a twice. While a 100 tons assault mechs' weight is about 117% of a 85 tons mech. It seems that it was a losing game already.
I think that the ratios of the various sizes to each other has to change in later eras . . . if the factors driving those ratios are truly need-based. It has been clearly pointed out in this thread that there is always a place for a unit that trades off both weapons and armor for speed. The problem light Mechs have is that they are facing more pressure from other units when it comes to fulfilling those types of roles.
Advanced tech allows the medium Mech to achieve very high speeds without having to trade out as much armor or firepower. This change is occurring at the same time that speed becomes less valuable as a tactical defense (pulse lasers, etc.) even while it retains its value on a larger operation or strategic level, making that extra armor on the mediums all the more valuable. The only tradeoff vs. a light in this case is cost (more materials, bigger engine, etc.).
If cost *is* a factor, then you have to start looking at faster vehicles since they are usually even cheaper than light Mechs. A light Mech is still a bit more durable than these units, but not as much as it used to be . . . not so much because of advanced tech, but because of the rules changes that accompanied the advanced tech as it was introduced IRL. Total Warfare (and MaxTech before it) made vehicles more durable. This makes them last longer on the battlefield but this does mean that they are putting more "pressure" on Mechs when it comes to filling certain roles. This is especially true of VTOLs, which now carry their own partial cover with them in the form of rotors (and can launch out of Dropships too??).
Light Mechs occupy a window between costlier mediums and the cheaper vehicles . . . that window is just a fair bit smaller than it was during the pre-TW Succession Wars days, so IMO they probably shouldn't be 30% of an RAT anymore.
[Edit for a couple of spelling errors]
And that's exactly why protomechs are sucks. Clans battle armor is a new idea for Inner Sphere(at least for non-ComGuard military). But what does the idea of protomech achieved? Just prove that Clans are sucks? But it is no secret and not all Clans are keep using protomechs either.
But the idea of protomech squad is not so bad I think. As I said above, grouping 4 to 6 bug class light mechs(around 20 tons) and consider it as similar to a proper battlemech seems not so bad for tactical board. Just think them as the big (and also usually very fast) battle armor.
Although it is not so easy to make ultralight mechs similar to protomech, but 20 to 25 tons mech seems not so bad for this.
-
stratops p 22
(I have the weirdest memory. Wish it worked as well for practical things)
Thanks! :) :thumbsup: :beer:
I think that the ratios of the various sizes to each other has to change in later eras . . . if the factors driving those ratios are truly need-based. It has been clearly pointed out in this thread that there is always a place for a unit that trades off both weapons and armor for speed. The problem light Mechs have is that they are facing more pressure from other units when it comes to fulfilling those types of roles.
Advanced tech allows the medium Mech to achieve very high speeds without having to trade out as much armor or firepower. This change is occurring at the same time that speed becomes less valuable as a tactical defense (pulse lasers, etc.) even while it retains its value on a larger operation or strategic level, making that extra armor on the mediums all the more valuable. The only tradeoff vs. a light in this case is cost (more materials, bigger engine, etc.).
Agreed. Advanced Tech does allow Medium Mechs and vehicles to compete more against Light Mechs in some roles. However, those same technologies do improve light mechs. So they're still effective in those roles.
If cost *is* a factor, then you have to start looking at faster vehicles since they are usually even cheaper than light Mechs. A light Mech is still a bit more durable than these units, but not as much as it used to be . . . not so much because of advanced tech, but because of the rules changes that accompanied the advanced tech as it was introduced IRL. Total Warfare (and MaxTech before it) made vehicles more durable. This makes them last longer on the battlefield but this does mean that they are putting more "pressure" on Mechs when it comes to filling certain roles. This is especially true of VTOLs, which now carry their own partial cover with them in the form of rotors (and can launch out of Dropships too??).
Vehicles are still largely limited by terrain. Even VTOLs getting to launch out of a dropship in the atmosphere is an advanced rule. I'm good with it but other players may not be. So it still comes down to ability and cost.
Light Mechs occupy a window between costlier mediums and the cheaper vehicles . . . that window is just a fair bit smaller than it was during the pre-TW Succession Wars days, so IMO they probably shouldn't be 30% of an RAT anymore.
[Edit for a couple of spelling errors]
I think things would be about how they would be in 3025 only with more advanced and expensive technologies.
-
This change is occurring at the same time that speed becomes less valuable as a tactical defense (pulse lasers, etc.) even while it retains its value on a larger operation or strategic level, making that extra armor on the mediums all the more valuable.
"Speed is armor" never really recovered after the appearance of pulse lasers... especially Clan pulse lasers. Notwithstanding Retry's warning about Long Toms, I think we could use some more really fast reflec-armor lights. The Gunsmith is a start.
-
"Speed is armor" never really recovered after the appearance of pulse lasers... especially Clan pulse lasers. Notwithstanding Retry's warning about Long Toms, I think we could use some more really fast reflec-armor lights. The Gunsmith is a start.
True but their speed still gives them an advantage that conventional units wouldn't have.
-
"Speed is armor" never really recovered after the appearance of pulse lasers... especially Clan pulse lasers. Notwithstanding Retry's warning about Long Toms, I think we could use some more really fast reflec-armor lights. The Gunsmith is a start.
I would say that "speed is armour" works fine against IS pulse lasers - they only have very small areas where you actually get better target numbers than conventional weapons - it's clan pulse lasers that are the killer.
-
I think the problem is dropships.
Outside civil wars where a single planet is split there's an attacker and a defender.
The defender may have one or more complete supply chains for canned food, diesel, ammunition, or armor plate on planet that can be raided with bugmechs, but a bugmech is 150 tons while a more versatile medium still capable of raiding is also 150 tons and a VTOL or hover is just 50 tons. The only reason to use light mechs offensively is if you don't have the budget to match your drop capacity.
The defender doesn't have a dropship bottleneck and can use as many light units as he can afford, but the attacker gets all his resupply from dropships. There's no spread out supply network to raid. Stuff like the Panther can justify itself as a mass unit for direct combat, but the bugs don't do so well. Scout mechs are also less critical because the defender has multiple airfields and accurate and up to date maps.
Why, in 2570, have the trends towards larger vehicles seen in tanks and naval vessels in reality not raised the ultralight line to 30 tons? No mech I'm aware of attempts a speed profile with an optimum mass under 30 tons until the Golden Century or Clan Invasion and I'm not entirely sure about the Fire Moth as I don't have the XLFE breakpoints memorized. Why during the Star League era when non-SLDF militaries are size limited and SLDF budgets are the next best thing to unlimited would people build lots of bugmech factories or keep existing bugmech factories around? If the arms limitation treaties don't limit the lightest mechs that's all the more reason to drop them from the light mech classification.
-
I think that's really a problem with the dropship rules myself.
A mech bay would have a lot of equipment in it. Those 150 tons are probably paying for elevators, repair equipment, catwalks, loading ramps, power cables, all sorts of things other than the mechs themselves. A Union class dropship would have 12 spaces, each one fully outfitted to securely transport and repair a battlemech while in space. That includes giving it access to the doors so you can make a combat drop (so if you aren't close to one of the doors, you'll need a big hallway for the mech to walk down).
We've all seen the pictures of a mech standing in a mech bay, with cranes and heavy equipment around them, looking all construction-y. That's what exists inside a dropship. However, that shouldn't be the only way to transport mechs. We know that you can cram them into the cargo hold of a Mule or other large ship, but the dropship rules don't really go into a lot of detail about moving large numbers of infantry, vehicles, or light mechs. Even though there should be a way to do it.
We should really have some sort of rules about cramming in extra equipment. If a mech bay is large enough to hold a Battlemaster, you should really be able to shove 4 Stingers into the same space, as long as you take out all the maintenance equipment first. That would eliminate that bay for making repairs, but the mechs could physically fit in there.
-
I think that's really a problem with the dropship rules myself.
A mech bay would have a lot of equipment in it. Those 150 tons are probably paying for elevators, repair equipment, catwalks, loading ramps, power cables, all sorts of things other than the mechs themselves. A Union class dropship would have 12 spaces, each one fully outfitted to securely transport and repair a battlemech while in space. That includes giving it access to the doors so you can make a combat drop (so if you aren't close to one of the doors, you'll need a big hallway for the mech to walk down).
We've all seen the pictures of a mech standing in a mech bay, with cranes and heavy equipment around them, looking all construction-y. That's what exists inside a dropship. However, that shouldn't be the only way to transport mechs. We know that you can cram them into the cargo hold of a Mule or other large ship, but the dropship rules don't really go into a lot of detail about moving large numbers of infantry, vehicles, or light mechs. Even though there should be a way to do it.
We should really have some sort of rules about cramming in extra equipment. If a mech bay is large enough to hold a Battlemaster, you should really be able to shove 4 Stingers into the same space, as long as you take out all the maintenance equipment first. That would eliminate that bay for making repairs, but the mechs could physically fit in there.
My personal head canon is that each bay has a gantry for holding and if necessary dropping a Mech. The gantry is strong enough to support 100 tons, any tonnage not used by the Mech can be attached on the exterior of the gantry.
-
I took a quick sarna dive, and discovered something just wrong.
average walk of new lights EDIT - 'sphere lights.
3055 - 7.5
3058 - 6.75
3060 - 6
3067 - 7.5
3075 - 6.3
3085 - 8.25
The average speed was going down as time went on. There was a spike in 3067, but the average speed of 3055 wasn't exceeded until 3085. Considering 3055 lights had a lot of heat sink problems, that leaves relatively few good lights
The designers were trying to re-create the panther/valkyrie at a time that niche was dying. I hadn't realized just how bad the problem was.
-
It would be better divided by Clan/IS . . .
The other problem is '55, '58 and '60 were TROs with backfill . . . though sometimes that helped, lol. The Icestorm & Snow Fox definitely helped raise the average as they are very fast lights . . . but offset by the Commando IIC & UrbanMech IIC. Same thing with the Star League designs being added into the books.
-
It would be better divided by Clan/IS . . .
The other problem is '55, '58 and '60 were TROs with backfill . . . though sometimes that helped, lol. The Icestorm & Snow Fox definitely helped raise the average as they are very fast lights . . . but offset by the Commando IIC & UrbanMech IIC. Same thing with the Star League designs being added into the books.
You're right. I didn't count any clan mechs. Their longer-ranged weapons mean they can have different design constraints.
-
uh oh, my favorite clan light only goes 5/8 and carries 2 ER LL ...it's going skew towards the slow side
-
And was criminally too slow for the era it was made . . . I love the design, but the Sharks were selling knowing they would have repeat customers.
-
def designed for something 30+ game years ago or so. During the invasion it would have been deadlier, but beatable (good mook/opfor for IS).
-
Oh yeah, the Crimson Hawk would have fit right in with the Adder and Kit Fox carving up lights and even IS mediums . . . and you know, I will take it back, the cERLLs give it such a advantage it can probably play with 5/8 meds, if barely.
-
Hah! never accuse us BS-ers (man that pun will never get old) of designing crap! ... What do you mean we are a few decades to late?
You are right, however. That is a pretty big IF when taking on some of the better IS mediums, even at 3025. Not a very clan like tactic to take a few pot shots, then back off.
The Crimson Hawk begs to be used in a mass fire situation.
-
Nah, I would take it against a Griffin or Wolverine in Invasion Clan vs IS . . .
-
It could take a few hits from them ... probably enough to spam return fire to bring them down.
It totally should have been an invasion mech.
aw man. Going up in the time line and 'upgrading' to an XXL Engine at the same weight gets it to 6/9 ... 7/11 if you spend an extra .5 tons; 8/12 for +1 ton. It's engine weights are so relatively light, it's hard to tweak. Drop 1 ER LL, and get more armor, speed, DHS (if needed) -- loose bang, but get more buck.
-
There's also the twin problems of trying to catch something as fast as a Locust, and the fact that hovercraft simply can't cross some types of terrain that mechs have no trouble navigating (something that was previously mentioned).
I can't help it. I know this is old and I am just re reading this thread but some reason I am picturing a lance of locust seeing the vtol chasing after them head into a patch of heavy forest for cover. spot the rest of the hunter. Pilot pop out of the mech and goes. Nanana you can catch me. before going deeper into the woods
-
I've also gone with the idea that there must be some secret advantage to light mech production that we don't fully see in game/build mechanics.
Even if you limit yourself to base tech levels offensive operations really need heavier units. If you have a union available for a raid, yes, you can fill it with 12 Stingers and Wasps, but 12 P-Hawks is generally preferable.
Defensively, without a limit on number of units you can deploy more light mechs and vehicles means more area coverage for a given price point.
So for my thinking at least a 3020s P-Hawk would be used as the scout/scout hunter element for raider/assault unit, where a planetary defender would deploy a pair of Wasps and a few cheap conventional units to cover a wider area in a defensive mode, for a similar budget. Just my 2 cents.
-
This is an incredibly stupid tactic.
I've used it. You'd be amazed at how some players believe scenarios should always be face-to-face battles -They usually wind up losing to people who don't play that way. Faced with the above scenario, what do you do, let them lob missiles at you until they start breaking things?
-
The problem with BT as a game and how most people play is that it distorts how it would be if it were a real universe.
Most people don't know how to wage war in a real universe. All the fiction, rules and fluff place the Mech at the top of the food chain, when longtime players know that a decent infantry/vehicle mix will give a 'Mech unit of similar BV or CBill value a good run for their money, even beat them, at the hands of a decent player.
-
Most people don't know how to wage war in a real universe.
I am SO glad I am one of these.
I think that regarding bug mechs transport is a major problem, but generally mech availability is (or was in 3025 at least) something to consider, and a mech, any mech was better than no mech.
A merc unit or a military unit that does not know what terrain they will be fielded in a few months time might prefer to invest in a bug than in 3 hovers that would suck if they go to an alpine planet next. And the survivality thing being said above also applies.
I like bugs. Bugs being 1 mechs out of every 5 makes sense to me. they are the light cavalry ridden by minor sons of the nobility, the raiders with elan, the ones that mess with your supplies and burn your villages, not the frontline heavy cavalry of the French that comes thundering at you in pitched battle.
Vehicles are just spearmen waiting to be ridden down, but they can make light cavalry flee if they work coordinately. Sometimes vehicles they become effective pikeman shiltrons and the mechs just impale themselves in them, but that happens to the best sometimes.
Infantry are caltrops: they mess a lot with cavalry of any kind or achieve nothing.
Cheers,
Xavi
-
I like bugs. Bugs being 1 mechs out of every 5 makes sense to me. they are the light cavalry ridden by minor sons of the nobility, the raiders with elan, the ones that mess with your supplies and burn your villages, not the frontline heavy cavalry of the French that comes thundering at you in pitched battle.
Excellent comparaison of Light 'Mechs toi cavalry elements.
My GM was a longtime wargamer who applied real war elements to campaigns, where scouting was crucial to the success of any battle. Most BT players consider scouting missions as boring, due to the use of swift Light Mechs. They don't realize how crucial to intel scouting missions are in a campaign. Inversely, most BT players have no concept of cavalry screens -units whose primary mission is to prevent enemy scouting elements from getting close enough to their main body to gather crucial intel. These screening elements are called piquets (also picket), whose duty is to act as a tripwire to spot enemy elements in order to alert the main body. A realistic campaign would be a continent-sized double-blind battle of dueling intelligence gathering.
Example:
Force A sends several fast scouting elements five km ahead of its main body.
Force B travels as a single unit, without any screening elements.
Force A's scouting elements locate Force B and at extreme range, report size, weight, numbers, speed, direction and location of that unit. Suddenly, Force A has a significant intelligence edge over Force B and may plan to ambush, interdict, etc., by calculating Force B's future location, and literally choose the field of battle. During the wars of the 18th and 19th centuries, such intel also allowed multiple forces to converge on a smaller unit, as Napoleon discovered in Russia, where Cossacks were literally everywhere and watched every move Le Grande Armee made, and those Cossacks literally chased the French all the way to Paris, annihilating stragglers and looting while in pursuit.
While infantry and vehicles can be decent substitutes, what vehicle has the ability to travel through varied terrain than a 'Mech? VTOLs and Hovers are fine in Earth-like environs but what about on an airless moon or planet with very thin atmosphere? The same would prevent ICE engines that have to breathe to function. I recall a campaign where my opponent fielded scout infantry on light Jeep-like vehicles, desperately searching behind my lines to find my artillery units. I never spotted them physically but determined their use of secondary roads and carefully laid mines near blind turns, where they would have the least ability to spot them while on the move. The fragility of the unarmored scout vehicles resulted in the loss of several teams and likely prompted them to use cross country movement, which hampered their effectiveness. Needless to say, it wasn't until my opponent started deploying UAVs did he come close to threatening my artillery elements. The UAV overflew my Chaparral battery and from the next room (which is how we handled double blind ops) I heard the distinct sound of a forehead slamming into a desk -He had rolled snake eyes on the most critical roll of the campaign. I explained that the DCMS operator was probably watching hentai at the time...and was momentarily distracted. It happens, especially in the BTU.
-
By 3072 ICE engines should get replaced with Fuel Celll varieties. Also you tend to know ahead of time you are going to an airless moon so a Fuel cell combat vehicle with sealed life support would be normal . The combat fuel cell engine is the reason why light mechs get to be less than ideal .
-
As I said earlier, as long as don't weight one light mech as same as a non-light mech or tanks, they may have a place in the battlefield - at least as the line unit.
I think that they are no more than a better protomech, NOT a regular mech, if it is on the frontline. Perhaps some kind of recon biped units are required. Perhaps some biped units are good on the irregular/weird missions, that is not the duty of the line units. But, their pathetic armor and pitiful armament means they are never be a same grade unit as the medium to assault mech/tanks. If you want to use them as the line unit, you better gather 3 to 6 of them as one squad, that is equal to one regular mech or tank.
Put a light mech as one mech in a lance that is expected to fight as the line troops is no more than the waste of space, or you must be not able to afford the regular unit and have to fill the gap by the inferior and cheap one. It's like as just put an armored truck on a tank platoon in the place of a MBT, just because you lost a tank and all you can bring right now is an armored truck modified by the company engineers.
-
By 3072 ICE engines should get replaced with Fuel Celll varieties. Also you tend to know ahead of time you are going to an airless moon so a Fuel cell combat vehicle with sealed life support would be normal . The combat fuel cell engine is the reason why light mechs get to be less than ideal .
You are also talking about vehicles limited to wheeled and tracked variants. I checked on numbers of light vehicles available between 3070 and 3075 and while fusion engines make up half of total designs, ICE vs Fuel Cell are 50/50, even though a Fuel Cell vehicle's price is closer to that of a fusion engine. So, I see in introduction of FC but no actual replacement of ICE in designs, as TRO 3075 still contains ICE engined vehicles fielded by the various factions.
-
They should have been a whole Fuel Cell combat vehicle revolution at 3072 even it's own TRO . I designed an environmentally sealed Vedette Moon strider with a fuel cell engine w a light AC/2 w precision ammo a thunderbolt 5 , small x pulse laser and a TAG in a turret w 148 pts of heavy Ferro fibrous . As well as a Skulker Dune Buggy environmentally sealed fuel cell w Bloodhound Active probe 3 ton infantry compartment and a trailer hitch / 10 ton trailet w LRM 10 w smoke to help close . No it is not as nice as the faster hover and VTOLs I use on planets with an atmosphere but it does not suck . A dropship still can carry 3 light vehicle bays for 1 mech bay . The airless moon is uncommon but not unheard of. Underwater its worse a mini sub w an LRT launcher can normally out range and speed just about any mech .
Light mechs are ok for militia particularly urban combat. I like the wight varient w the snub Nosed PPC and jump jets . But eating space on an offensive combat dropship not so much . Except for a jumping mech in an urban fight light vehicles just makes more sense 3072 and after . Before that date it had a very real role in an offensive order of battle. Faux lights like the Cicada is usually not a disappointing investment. Light mechs w XL engines tend to be just too fragile and expensive generally with specific exceptions but not as a rule .
-
minor note (apologies if I posted it earlier): on a campaign level, the ICE gets 1,000 km while the Fuel Cell gets 666 km (figured at 10% of fuel weight as directed in TM).
-
Light mechs are in a weird place right now because of rule changes that make vehicles more effective, but design-wise nobody has adjusted to the new rules. It's the same reason why infantry platoons are as effective as they are right now.
In the BMR and before era, vehicles were critically vulnerable to fire in a way that they just aren't now (and just vulnerable to hits in general). A Wasp was a perfectly good vehicle killer because it could carry infernos. In BMR, even hovercraft and other fast vehicles would die like flies if you shot them with LB-X cluster rounds. A lot of those vulnerabilities have been removed or lessened in the modern rules, but the background material has not changed to reflect this.
It's disingenuous to act like we don't know why people would ever use light mechs over vehicles, when we know exactly why people did. For the time period when most of the game's history was created, and most of the material was published, there were huge disadvantages to vehicles. They may not exist now, but that was because of a conscious decision to change it, which wasn't followed through as it related to story or background. Vehicles got better everywhere but the fiction.
-
minor note (apologies if I posted it earlier): on a campaign level, the ICE gets 1,000 km while the Fuel Cell gets 666 km (figured at 10% of fuel weight as directed in TM).
It has come up, but FCE is easier to refuel than ICE engines. On a campaign, you also have to figure out how much ICE fuel supplies you are moving forward, can you seize any supplies (and is there a formulation difference), can you seize refineries with stock to produce your needs, and will any of the on planet sources be contaminated.
Water on the other hand . . . is multipurpose and is a lot easier to access than ICE fuel stocks.
To massey's point . . . really light vehicles were the only ones to take b/c of their cost and 'speed is armor.'
-
Vehicles got better everywhere but the fiction.
I fully agree. The same goes for infantry. Use the current rules in early Clan invasion scenarios and you soon realize that no matter how much Clan fanboys want to refight the invasion, the Clans would never have gotten as far facing conventional troops and vehicles, even without post-invasion technology.
-
Price point . As tech went up so did the cost per unit . Be it a Wolfhound WLF 3S at 4.7+ million C bills or the Puma-E at about 7.5 million C bills . That is enough for 2 or even 3 of the aforementioned Vedette Moonstrider environmentally sealed fuel cell tanks. Mechs are produced by the dozens while conventional vehicles by the hundreds or even thousands . That makes them attrition units . Strategically you can win if the enemy loses 1 mech to ten times it's weight in conventional vehicles as you can replace them faster . The Clans started the invasion with about 1 year logistical train. They lose in a war of attrition as their whole culture revolves around managing loses by doing batchal bids . The first campaign I was in the Clan invasion era we won by drowning them in combat vehicles along with some mechs . The Hells Horses showed up soon after in the next campaign. Light mechs with XL or light fusion engines are more expensive than you give them credit for . Assault mechs enen in later years about half still use a standard or compact fusion engine . An 8Q Awesome costs about a half million C bills than the 35 ton Puma- E.
-
I fully agree. The same goes for infantry. Use the current rules in early Clan invasion scenarios and you soon realize that no matter how much Clan fanboys want to refight the invasion, the Clans would never have gotten as far facing conventional troops and vehicles, even without post-invasion technology.
Except most of the times the Clans could bypass a conventional forces defense to seize the objectives. Bring a battalion of armor that is stationed on the periphery along with a battalion or two of mechanized infantry . . . my Gargoyles are going to slow a lot of it down if not stall it out on the roads, while they run around it to race for the capital. Rifle infantry? Sure, I have Elementals and those same Gargs have Inferno SRMS . . .
. . . oh yeah, we do not zell vehicles, so I can whistle up my support from Naga if its part of the bid- it was not always included. The Clan Invasion was a repeat of the early WWII blitzkrieg on planet after planet due to their greater strategic speed. The logistics advantages and Clan mentality differences about losses just compounded their strategic abilities.
-
++mod notice++
This thread is about light BattleMechs. Take all discussion about custom vehicles (fuel cell or otherwise) to the Fan Designs forum.
-
I think you have to keep in mind the mentality of Inner Sphere nations. We tend to set aside the political aspect when we wargame a scenario. Pre-Clan Invasion, you had a balance between national forces and local nobility. You also have sort of an informal agreement between nations as to how they will conduct warfare. The Clans didn't run into an Inner Sphere that was prepared for external invasion and who knew the habits of their invaders.
National vs local -- Nobody really wanted their subordinates to gain too much power. Baron von Sauerkraut doesn't want Sir Bob (his vassal and inheritor to the title of Mayor of Cleveland) to have a large military at his disposal. Sir Bob needs to keep his Phoenix Hawk in good repair, and that's basically it. If Sir Bob decides to buy 30 ICE-powered tanks, then he suddenly becomes a threat to Baron von Sauerkraut's control over the American Midwest. While it's helpful against invasion, it's disruptive to the local political balance. Likewise, if the Baron puts together 5 regiments of light ICE tanks, then he becomes a challenge to his lord, the Marquis dePervert. And so on it goes up the chain.
The other balancing factor is that conventional forces, at least in the fiction, remain highly susceptible to attacks that specifically target them. Yeah you might be able to raise an old WWII style human wave army, but that's only going to last until somebody decides it's worth their while to kill every living being on the battlefield. The Inner Sphere moved away from that style of total war, but by necessity that means you don't force your enemy into that position. Don't tempt them by making it the only logical choice.
What that means is that vehicle regiments in the Inner Sphere are probably always kept fewer in number or at least lower in importance than Battlemech regiments. You don't spam them because it's disruptive to the power structure. You don't want the guy down the food chain to bring a lot of conventional forces, and the guy higher up the food chain doesn't want you to do it either. And none of you want the national government to do it -- then you'd be out of a job. Plus, those forces are only powerful until they become the primary target. Once you start getting Battlemechs and Aerospace Fighters that are designed to slaughter vehicles and infantry, then it's over.
Edit: Hence, the reason why light mechs make sense.
-
Like all topics in Battletech it is Era specific .. Light mechs role in the Star League was in addition to standard role aforementioned was to support infantry formations. The Succession wars they got too valuable for that role . Clan invasion the were the only mechs that could routinely keep up and go faster than the Clan 5/8 typical movement profile . At the Civil War and Jihad Combined arms became the new normal light mech mission slots were replaced by light vehicles if convenient and possible. I take an Overlord lose 12 mech bays 1800 tons and replace it with 12 light vehicle bays for 1000 tons , 200 large support for Salvage. and 600 tons of cargo minus 2 or 3 platoons of Battle Armor . Single old dropship that the bays get reconfigured for combined arms . This gives me the flexibility to attack with 16 mechs and 8 light combat vehicles carrying a squad or 2 of battle armor . At the DZ 8 mechs and 12 combat vehicles secure that . Salvage unit is a Tunbo w Groundhog Exoskeletons with mission equipment. Internal cargo permits have spare ammo and armor for a second or maybe even a third battle. The O-Bakemono's incorporate artillery in the mech forces .So I get total combined arms feel in 1 dropship without getting my hands on a super rare Conquistador . Throw in a mature Tactical Doctrine and you are all set . As I am losing 12 mechs for this flexibility dropping those mechs in which the light vehicles can take those combat roles and mission just makes sense . So I dropped all light mech use by 3072 and gradually started to reduce there use by 3058 . At 3050 I used light mechs very heavily. So like I said ERA depedant answer. For Urban defense 3 Wright 2 SC 5/8/5 light mechs with Snub Nosed PPCs. And replacing the 2 medium lasers with A C3 slave and a TAG supported a Shiltron Prime is just a great miltia defense lance . Light mechs never seem to lose the urban combat role regardless of ERA.
-
++mod notice++
Clearly, I was too specific. Take ALL the talk of customs (ESPECIALLY custom non-mechs) to Fan Designs where it belongs.
-
Except most of the times the Clans could bypass a conventional forces defense to seize the objectives.
Funny, I thought only the Clans would abandon defending an objective just to fight... 8)
Why would you field light 'Mechs?
The are cheap, mobile weapons platforms, and you have throngs of redundant pilots ready to work for food. While a light might be challenged by state of the art infantry forces and vehicles, anything less than the best would be just so many targets, such as insurgencies, pirates and unruly mobs. Most vehicles are just upgraded tanks or armored cars, concepts that predate WW1. VTOLs and hovers appeared just a few decades later, and the use of these units is well documented, and tactics have not changed in centuries.
I had originally written a long, scientific dissertation on why the FCE should have appeared soon after the world-shaking Fusion Power Revolution (in comparison the the Industrial Revolution) that would have spawned countless related technologies but in the end, it would have made war (other than commonplace political disputes) obsolete...and we can't have that, can we?
-
throngs of redundant pilots ready to work for food.
I don't want to imagine what that would do to the morale of your nominally elite forces, even the ones not in bugs. Social status only goes so far.
I kinda expect the effectiveness of vees, ASF and infantry to be adjusted down next edition. Not to BMRr levels, but down.
-
I don't want to imagine what that would do to the morale of your nominally elite forces, even the ones not in bugs. Social status only goes so far.
Real elite forces would not care. The posers might.
-
There was a bit more complexity in the relationship between mechs and hierarchy. At the lowest end of the totem pole were the dispossessed, and impoverished nobles who would dream of piloting an Urbanmech in open plains, if it meant that they could pilot a machine. The next tier were people who made it into mech academies without owning their own mechs. This group has surprising potential for mobility, but they are at best nouveau rich, and viewed with great contempt by those from lines of heraldry, and even some of the dispossessed, and impoverished nobles. These bottom two categories are excellent starting points for roleplaying. The next tier would be people who own whatever they have, and some minor nobility. They will pilot their family locust with pride, and use the knowledge passed on concerning how to use it well. They would be considered respectable in social circles. These mechwarriors could work for a local militia, or even sign up for service in a line regiment. It only goes up from there. Slowly people accumulate multiple mechs, and try to work their way into higher levels of nobility, or divide their mechs among their offspring. A lance of bugs can prove a valuable tool for social advancement, because they are cheap, yet you can easily find a planetary noble who will want them in their army, or a line regiment that needs a temporary patch. Just keep in mind that missiles are expensive.
Acquiring prestige using lights is quite possible. In the periphery, lights might provide the bulk of defense against pirates. Certain medals will be out of reach, but if you perform your job well, recognition can follow. There is always a prestigious light unit checking out who does their job well. If you work your way into it, you may leave with much wealth, land, and prestige. You may even leave with a Phoenix Hawk, or Assassin gifted to your family.
-
Yeah, even though offspring X is from upper nobility, that means naught (or should) when it comes to assigning mechs. That Wasp pilot is also nobility and has done 5 full missions with it, s/he's getting the next medium that is available. Not new-guy with strings to pull. YMMV, but that's the game of BT Life (new guy may have a lot of pull). Maybe it's already ingrained that everyone (not really everyone) starts off with a Light.
It's the OJT Mech. (you go, commando from MW2:Mercenaries!)
-
Sometimes rank, wealth and station is everything...
GENERAL BURGOYNE. Mr. Dudgeon: we are only doing this—
RICHARD DUDGEON. Because you're paid to do it.
MAJOR SWINDON. You insolent— (He swallows his rage.)
GENERAL BURGOYNE (with much charm of manner). Ah, I am really sorry that you should think that, Mr. Dudgeon. If you knew what my commission cost me, and what my pay is, you would think better of me. I should be glad to part from you on friendly terms.
A commission in the Royal Army was sometimes the only way a man of station and wealth to gain political influence, and that commission was often costly, with low pay. The main rewards were a chance of recognition and the opportunity to make contacts with other people under similar condition or the few who who are already rich and powerful, who have no need to improve their lot in life and are just bored.
For the average House citizen, becoming a 'Mech pilot is an escape from the drudgery of farm or factory, as well as a chance to rise in social status, above commoner. For a noble, being a 'Mech pilot is a confirmation of social superiority, and the means to hobnob with established, influential social elites and the super-wealthy, plus forge connections with those who could boost your career in the future.
A light 'Mech may not have the awe factor of an assault class machine, but it is a huge step up from being dispossessed.
-
It seems that the distinctive culture makes keep making the lights, then. I am not used to 'being mechwarrior makes the person superior over a tank commander' despite they are no more than just a tank commander.... But the world actually does anyway.
-
I am not used to 'being mechwarrior makes the person superior over a tank commander' despite they are no more than just a tank commander.... But the world actually does anyway.
I agree but the factions' academies crank out mechwarriors faster than they can produce 'mechs or even fill open slots in their militaries, so you will always have excess pilots ready to do anything to do what they were trained to do.
-
I understand why Tripod is released on Dark Age. Only making the single-seater walker tanks does not meet the supply of fresh battlemech pilots.
-
I agree but the factions' academies crank out mechwarriors faster than they can produce 'mechs or even fill open slots in their militaries, so you will always have excess pilots ready to do anything to do what they were trained to do.
In some families, there will be a prearrangement with a local government to grant their child a few years of service, before they live off of their wealth, or run their businesses. This is just part of the stratification of Battletech. Those families may even pay a noble to rent a loftier looking machine, with no intention of their child ever fighting in it. Others will demand that their child serve a tour of duty within their respective state to acquire their inheritance. Others may simply demand that they have an academy certificate hanging on their wall. There are many competing interests related to mechs in the Battletech universe. If you do not own a mech, and the House will not allow you to pilot a state owned mech, you may find sponsors who will back you conditionally. This sponsor might be the mother from one of those families, demanding that you serve their child's tour of duty. Their bribes can fix complications.
-
Sometimes rank, wealth and station is everything...
The Devil's Disciple
OK, the old British system wan not what I thought you were talking about, but it does make some sense. I'm sure there would be problems with it, but there's problems with every social setup.
It wouldn't surprise me if that was part of the 'warriors cabels' Hanse's grandfather died trying to crush.
I understand why Tripod is released on Dark Age. Only making the single-seater walker tanks does not meet the supply of fresh battlemech pilots.
Considering the sheer cost of those monsters, that is hardly a way to get more people in seats. You can get a company or more of decent lights for the same price.
-
I've used it. You'd be amazed at how some players believe scenarios should always be face-to-face battles -They usually wind up losing to people who don't play that way. Faced with the above scenario, what do you do, let them lob missiles at you until they start breaking things?
Forgive me, it's been a while since I made that post, but I think my thought was that along the lines of I only need to send my own scouts to attack your Lance of Locusts and they'll fold, your explanation says they'll run, which works out.
-
OK, the old British system wan not what I thought you were talking about, but it does make some sense. I'm sure there would be problems with it, but there's problems with every social setup.
It wouldn't surprise me if that was part of the 'warriors cabels' Hanse's grandfather died trying to crush.
Well, you shouldn't weight much for the personal bias against the officers.
Considering the sheer cost of those monsters, that is hardly a way to get more people in seats. You can get a company or more of decent lights for the same price.
Triskelion costs around 20,000,000 C-bill, but even consider its clantech weapons that's not so expensive enough. It would be possible to buy a demi-company of lackluster lights, though. And 75 tons is hard to say a monster either.
Also it is possible that they develop the other tripods too.
I know what you want to say, but what I want to say was non-superheavy one, that requires two personnel. Even if a medium biped mech is replaced by a medium tripod, you suddenly need two pilots instead of one.
-
I only need to send my own scouts to attack your Lance of Locusts and they'll fold, your explanation says they'll run, which works out.
Then you may have fallen into my trap. A lance of Locusts could walk backwards from most pursuers and pelt them with volleys of LRMs, often without reply. By the time you decide to run, you may escape if I allow it.
My usual strategy is to place a priority in destroying enemy scout assets, as I consider recon the most vital units of any military force. Many campaigns devolve into regiments stomping around like so many thousand pound gorillas and taking out their recon elements renders one of those gorillas blind. Many players say: "I'll just beeline for my target." That's fine, because if I know that, I can prepare mines, ambushes, pre-plotted artillery points, and all manners of obstacles to buy time for my defenders to turn the target into a death trap. Send out a lance of fast mediums to act as ersatz scouts, and they will be jumped by a company of Lights. Send out a company and a battalion will ambush them.
Campaign operations are never set scenarios, balanced for fairness -the players determine the forces that fight and the player who possesses the most accurate intel often has the initiative and the ability to choose when, where and what forces fight.
Some wargamers make a point to never fight a battle that wasn't already won, so take great pains to stack the deck in their favor. If the fight is fair, somebody screwed up.
The tactic of harassing an opponent is to goad them into making a predictable and often irrational action.
-
While a company of Mediums would be preferable to a company of Lights in MOST situations, having a company of Mediums with one of two of them being replaced by fast Lights would be better still, providing your medium-speed unit with fast recon and raiding assets. Of course, you could use a Cicada or Assassin instead of a Locust or Spider, but the cost would be higher and the end result probably wouldn't be all that much better. Those recon assets are there primarily to scout, not fight, and a 20 ton Locust can scout as well as a 40 ton Cicada over the same terrain.
Then you have the Periphery and the backwater regions of the Successor States, where a Light is a powerful military asset in its own right, compared to the light tanks, armored cars, and infantry that provide most of the local defense. Once production ramps up and the House armies start fielding larger numbers of heavier 'Mechs, that situation changes, and many of the Lights begin to fade into obsolescence.
-
Once production ramps up and the House armies start fielding larger numbers of heavier 'Mechs, that situation changes, and many of the Lights begin to fade into obsolescence.
That makes no sense at all. Production doesn't dictate tactics, it's the other way around. If a House requires fast, Medium 'Mechs, factories are told to produce fast, Medium 'Mechs. The SLDF could have entire regiments of heavy 'Mechs yet would field entire companies of Lights. Would the Clans ever abandon the production of Light Omnis because they can change all of their production to Heavies at the snap of a Khan's finger?
As long as there is warfare with 'Mechs, there will be a demand for Lights.
-
Production doesn't dictate tactics, it's the other way around.
That's not been true for centuries in real life.
Would the Clans ever abandon the production of Light Omnis because they can change all of their production to Heavies at the snap of a Khan's finger?
Yes. Very much so.
As long as there is warfare with 'Mechs, there will be a demand for Lights.
Also true. But that doesn't change that we're a reality where the bulk of military procurement is, at best, only *informed* by the military, and actually based almost exclusively on politics.
-
That's not been true for centuries in real life.
It's been the rule for centuries in real life.
Yes. Very much so.
Yet that have never happened, ever, even though it could be done.
Also true.
When politics dictate tactics, directly or indirectly, wars are lost. France found that out in 1940.
-
It's been the rule for centuries in real life.
And yet you contradict yourself immediately with one of the examples I was going to use. I guess you agree after all.
When politics dictate tactics, directly or indirectly, wars are lost. France found that out in 1940.
Yet that have never happened, ever, even though it could be done.
So what? You asked what would happen if they gave such an order. The result would be obvious.
-
France hd a very static tactical doctrine I. It's armed forces. Nothing to do with politicians there.
-
And yet you contradict yourself immediately with one of the examples I was going to use.
There was no contradiction -example, where the rule was broken supported my point. If your point was "Some Factions take stupid pills" we'd almost agree. There is no shortage of stupid pills in the BTU.
-
There was no contradiction -example, where the rule was broken supported my point. If your point was "Some Factions take stupid pills" we'd almost agree. There is no shortage of stupid pills in the BTU.
I have to disagree, it is not about single mistakes, in practice it is more about making smaller/less mistakes than the enemy.
-
France hd a very static tactical doctrine I. It's armed forces. Nothing to do with politicians there.
France had an anti-military, Socialist government between the wars and did all it could to hamstring its military, and they agreed to a substitute to fielding an army: The Maginot Line. The French plans included that France would advance to meet German forces and slowly retreat to the Maginot Line, which would halt the enemy...
It was ALL politics, the French government, even aware that France could never win alone against Germany, failed in establishing sufficient support from its allies and potential allies. They gambled on the chance that the US would gladly join the UK to defend France.
-
There was no contradiction -example, where the rule was broken supported my point. If your point was "Some Factions take stupid pills" we'd almost agree. There is no shortage of stupid pills in the BTU.
No. You said: "Production doesn't dictate tactics, it's the other way around."
That's simply and absolutely not true. Further, not every entity that designs its equipment subordinate to political objective gets immediately punished for it. The Bradley, the Eurofighter. The Kuznetsov "cruiser". There's countless examples.
-
The Bradley, the Eurofighter. The Kuznetsov "cruiser". There's countless examples.
Okay, your opinions.
The Bradley wasn't a political product, the US Army, in a long-delayed response to the Soviet BMP, in fact, much of the politics involved was the prevention of a replacement for the obsolete M113. Nonetheless, the Bradley wasn't the government saying: "We build these and you figure out how to use them" issue -The Army already had the doctrine and wanted a vehicle designed and produced to meet doctrinal requirements, while ultimately dictated production.
The Eurofighter only involved politics due to the number of nations involved in its development. Its successful design is reflected in the number of sales outside of Europe, so I don't understand your use of it as an example.
I agree that the Admiral Kuznetsov was designed to exploit a loophole in the 1936 Montreux Treaty, penned when aircraft carriers were tiny vessels. Still, the Admiral Kuznetsov is a practical design that more than fulfils its assigned role...and Russia has one.
-
So, a lot of people are down on light mechs. There's two issues: one is that the lore doesn't integrate with the stats to support them so that some people think they only really have roleplaying value; the other is that if you have a BV constraint that you are taking into to-the-death combat, you can always minmax in a way that favors more durable units.
My response would be, well, then the bonus to speed must be too low, or the Cbills price tag and the BV aren't sufficiently matching up to what the unit brings to the table, which might be the same thing depending on your tastes.
What kind of bonuses would you need to make these a locust or stinger attractive? Or where else are the lights too weak a unit?
-
France had an anti-military, Socialist government between the wars and did all it could to hamstring its military, and they agreed to a substitute to fielding an army: The Maginot Line. The French plans included that France would advance to meet German forces and slowly retreat to the Maginot Line, which would halt the enemy...
It was ALL politics, the French government, even aware that France could never win alone against Germany, failed in establishing sufficient support from its allies and potential allies. They gambled on the chance that the US would gladly join the UK to defend France.
I'd say that citations are needed, but it would be off topic.
-
That makes no sense at all. Production doesn't dictate tactics, it's the other way around. If a House requires fast, Medium 'Mechs, factories are told to produce fast, Medium 'Mechs. The SLDF could have entire regiments of heavy 'Mechs yet would field entire companies of Lights. Would the Clans ever abandon the production of Light Omnis because they can change all of their production to Heavies at the snap of a Khan's finger?
As long as there is warfare with 'Mechs, there will be a demand for Lights.
Actually production dominates tactics in the reality. In a computer game, you may pick whatever you want so 'production' is not much a problem. But in the reality, all you got is all you can use. No tactics is in use if it rely on the forces only exist in the staff officer's personal delusion, unless that staff have the supernatural power to summon an army of phantom units out of nowhere.
The resource is always limited, even for the most superpower nations. You may suggest to making some kind of units, but if you order the expensive one it is unlikely that you can get enough of them.
Yes, sometimes you need something fast, and fast ones are usually not so durable or powerful. But if you have enough money, you will have something enough to have good speed as well as capable offense/defense capability. And most lights are lackluster in combat, especially for 20 tonners. We do need some recons, but they are never be the main force unless the armed force is too poor to acquire regular line units.
The first step of weave a plan is to know yourself - to know what you have and what you can.
-
Well, you shouldn't weight much for the personal bias against the officers.
I'm Canadian; the mythology of "Lions lead by Donkeys" is deep in us. Our senior leadership during WWI was 'interesting.' One guy kept putting himself up for the Victoria Cross and getting turned down.
-
The thing that lights do not do well in a phone booth battle (99.9% of what we play in the tabletop) does not make lights useless, just less than optimal (yes, you can say useless) in that particular environment.
-
The Maginot line was not such a bad idea. The problem with France was tha got did not extend to Belgium (there you have your politics) and that the rapid reaction forces were not well prepared to perform that role, lead or with a decent Comms suite. And there was a lot of military faults there, not political.
-
Didn't Belgium have their own forts which didn't stop the Germans?
-
Didn't Belgium have their own forts which didn't stop the Germans?
Yes but only in certain places and not a continuous line, which hadn't been built with airborne forces in mind.
-
Belgium simply didn't have enough of a military to stop a determined land invasion. They were too small a country.
-
So, a lot of people are down on light mechs. There's two issues: one is that the lore doesn't integrate with the stats to support them so that some people think they only really have roleplaying value; the other is that if you have a BV constraint that you are taking into to-the-death combat, you can always minmax in a way that favors more durable units.
My response would be, well, then the bonus to speed must be too low, or the Cbills price tag and the BV aren't sufficiently matching up to what the unit brings to the table, which might be the same thing depending on your tastes.
What kind of bonuses would you need to make these a locust or stinger attractive? Or where else are the lights too weak a unit?
I think we need to have further discussion. The Locust can be best compared to the Mercury, Mongoose, Hermes, Hussar, Spider, and the Cicada. These are mechs that push the engine limit, and in the case of the Spider, the mobility ceiling. The Assassin, and Jenner are secondary comparisons, which both feature distinct advantages.
The most telling choice is possibly the Mongoose, which is widely hailed as one of the best designed light mechs in the game.
-
Belgium simply didn't have enough of a military to stop a determined land invasion. They were too small a country.
The forts could have held (Or at least performed far better). Too much of their garrison was drunk. It was so bad that some were taken by single soldiers.
-
The report on the taking of Even Emael (spelling?) The largest fort they had and was taken by the fallschimjagers is quite blatant in how easy it was for them to go quer it once they were inside, despite being like 10% in number of soldiers compared to the garisson.
-
No. You said: "Production doesn't dictate tactics, it's the other way around."
That's simply and absolutely not true. Further, not every entity that designs its equipment subordinate to political objective gets immediately punished for it. The Bradley, the Eurofighter. The Kuznetsov "cruiser". There's countless examples.
don't forget the french relied in big tanks that in the end prove to be hanger queens but as far as the public was concern those tanks plus the line would push any invasion out
-
The report on the taking of Even Emael (spelling?) The largest fort they had and was taken by the fallschimjagers is quite blatant in how easy it was for them to go quer it once they were inside, despite being like 10% in number of soldiers compared to the garisson.
If you do not have a competent troops manning the fort, a building is little more than a building.
-
don't forget the french relied in big tanks that in the end prove to be hanger queens but as far as the public was concern those tanks plus the line would push any invasion out
The tanks weren't hanger queens, they were superior to early-war German tanks. The issue was that France (and everyone else) didn't think it was physically possible for Germany to advance as quickly as it did- it took Germany three days to cross ground that French military experts expected them to take two weeks. This was partially because of Germany moving their tanks through terrain nobody expected tanks to be able to cross, and partially because at that point in the war they were issuing their troops methamphetamine so the soldiers could march for three days without resting.
-
And radios. All German vehicles had radios. No other power used radios in their fighting vehicles at this point. That made the Germans far more able to coordinate themselves and with the infantry than rival tanks. And yes, early war German tanks were nothing to write home about except for that radio and their doctrinal use.
-
That makes no sense at all. Production doesn't dictate tactics, it's the other way around. If a House requires fast, Medium 'Mechs, factories are told to produce fast, Medium 'Mechs. The SLDF could have entire regiments of heavy 'Mechs yet would field entire companies of Lights. Would the Clans ever abandon the production of Light Omnis because they can change all of their production to Heavies at the snap of a Khan's finger?
As long as there is warfare with 'Mechs, there will be a demand for Lights.
In Battletech? Where Corean has a factory on New Avalon that produces Valkyries by the score, but it’s basically a black box that no one dared mess with for centuries?
“A shame about that heavy company that got shattered by the Kuritas, Colonel. The good news is that Procurement has reserves inbound, they should arrive next month.”
“Already? I’m surprised they could get a dozen heavy Mechs to us so fast!”
“Oh, no Colonel. You misunderstand. They’re sending you a dozen Valkyries.”
“But the mechs I lost were Marauders and Warhammers.”
“Yes, well. As you say, they can’t get us a dozen heavies that fast. And anyway, other units that are higher priority are getting the ones that are available. You get a dozen Valkyries.”
-
Actually production dominates tactics in the reality.
This. Despite what someone else in the thread seems to think.
-
The resource is always limited, even for the most superpower nations. You may suggest to making some kind of units, but if you order the expensive one it is unlikely that you can get enough of them.
That might limit number of units in the field but the tactics won't change at all, considering little has changed in decades.
The production of the Merkava tank was halted due to a change in tactics -The MBT was only useful on a conventional battlefield and suffered fighting insurgencies. Tactics dictated production.
The forts could have held (Or at least performed far better). Too much of their garrison was drunk. It was so bad that some were taken by single soldiers.
That may have been so during the Sitzkrieg, which was more like the Cold War but once the border was crossed, that just wouldn't happen. Ironically, the Maginot Line lasted longer than the conventional French forces, the Germans were only able to capture about 10% of the facilities before the government ordered the remaining forts to surrender. All in all, the theory of substituting a defensive wall in place of an army failed.
Belgium simply didn't have enough of a military to stop a determined land invasion. They were too small a country.
Their defense was based on slowing an invader long enough for their allies to respond. It happened with Waterloo...
don't forget the french relied in big tanks that in the end prove to be hanger queens but as far as the public was concern those tanks plus the line would push any invasion out
French tanks were superior to those fielded by the Germans. France actually had superior mobile forces but lacked in leadership and they learned nothing from the Blitzkrieg in Poland -They were still fighting WW1.
The issue was that France (and everyone else) didn't think it was physically possible for Germany to advance as quickly as it did- it took Germany three days to cross ground that French military experts expected them to take two weeks.
Lord Gort, commander of the BEF, expected that he would have two or three weeks to prepare for the Germans to advance 100 kilometres (60 mi) to the Dyle but the Germans arrived in four days.
Back on topic...
Light 'Mechs just aren't used by major characters in the BTU -The real celebrities pilot heavies and assaults, which allows them to be gods of the battlefield. Nobody wants to read about some bug 'Mech playing hide and seek with another bug 'Mech, because they'd be nickel-and-diming each other, if they hit at all, instead of vaporizing their enemies.
The thing that lights do not do well in a phone booth battle (99.9% of what we play in the tabletop) does not make lights useless, just less than optimal (yes, you can say useless) in that particular environment.
I'd say the average BT player doesn't use their Lights well in phone booth battles...few 'Mechs use an entire board for movement, even lights. With the maneuverability of most Lights, I own slower 'Mechs.
-
Greyson and Lori before they got other rides, and a few supporting characters. The light guard guys in the warrior trilogy and 'recon company' guys from malicious intent are the ones that immediately came to my mind.
-
I'd say the average BT player doesn't use their Lights well in phone booth battles...few 'Mechs use an entire board for movement, even lights. With the maneuverability of most Lights, I own slower 'Mechs.
Yeah, I agree here. Though it's largely because of how the base game works. It's meant for 4 on 4 knife fights, and that's not the environment a Light can generally shine in. As you point out, their key role is being the eyes of the larger formation. And most players rarely play at that scale, even in RP.
Now, I'm running a campaign with a merc recon company, and its mostly lights. It's fun. But only because of the heavy, heavy RP component.
-
As you point out, their key role is being the eyes of the larger formation. And most players rarely play at that scale, even in RP.
That's because BT isn't a wargame. My game club was lucky because we were basically a wargame club and we had several Army veterans, two of whom were recon trained. Scouting missions are closer to chess than playing WH40K, and few BT players have the patience or discipline for it. Most just want to charge into combat, whereas, in one campaign, my recon character was a mercenary who had to fire his weapons maybe twice in over a decade of play... Most players couldn't handle that.
-
That's because BT isn't a wargame. My game club was lucky because we were basically a wargame club and we had several Army veterans, two of whom were recon trained. Scouting missions are closer to chess than playing WH40K, and few BT players have the patience or discipline for it. Most just want to charge into combat, whereas, in one campaign, my recon character was a mercenary who had to fire his weapons maybe twice in over a decade of play... Most players couldn't handle that.
Yep, the ideal usage can often require a specific mindset. Some have it, some learn it, the rest simply don't.
-
Most players couldn't handle that.
More to the point: most people aren't interested in that kind of game at all. So why subject yourself that only the GM finds fun?
-
More to the point: most people aren't interested in that kind of game at all. So why subject yourself that only the GM finds fun?
True, most are happy playing "D&D but with robots" scenarios. I played BT for years without bothering to learn the factions or backstory because I was never into sci-fi themes. I don't know half the factions from Star Trek and I consider "Spaceballs" as the best Star Wars episode, even though I've never watched through the whole film.
-
That might limit number of units in the field but the tactics won't change at all, considering little has changed in decades.
The production of the Merkava tank was halted due to a change in tactics -The MBT was only useful on a conventional battlefield and suffered fighting insurgencies. Tactics dictated production.
But the SLDF officers are have to rely on the old tactics until they replace most of their Merkava to the newer one, or do their best to make the makeshift tactics with these outdated machines. And you know, the new production costs not so insignificant time. Before then, all the frontline units can do is just utilize what they have as best as possible.
The change of meta calls for the change of production, of course, but still the production matters in the reality because it determines what you actually have. On a computer game, you simply put what you want without such matters. On a RPG, the game master can rules what you have so at least the initial spend is not so problematic depend on your persuade skill. But even on there, there are the concept of limiting resource. And you can't set each person/faction's assets as you want in the reality.
Seriously, you can't use the cavalry tactics without a cavalryman or a horse(or its equivalence). That's why Aztecs were not using the cavalry for century, and many nations on the history are short on cavalry, for example. They don't use cavalry much because they thinks that infantry is far better. Actually it's half correct - infantry is actually far better, not for their sheer prowess, but the cheaper cost to make up the difference. So the truth is, they CANNOT use massive cavalry.
It is not a secret that only a handful of elite cavalry units are able to decimate the infantry units that far outnumbers them in the pre-modern era, and the history proves it. But in the reality, almost all nations of the era were still utilize the massive number of infantry, despite of the fact that a cavalry is worth a dozen of infantry or more. I remember that only the modern times(around 18th to 19th) cavalry have very high percent in the army of western europe, despite horse is still not so cheap to get(and you can't acquire them so fast either).
Yes, there are some specialized job that is not so easy on horseback. But it is not the only reason. it is because the most nations are not able to afford enough horse and train such a massive number of cavalryman. Only the nomadic nations are possible to do, for they are have to learn the riding skills and hunting, which is essential to cavalry. But the rest of them are not able to afford such expense.
Also, even if you want to have a battalion size of brand new M1 Abrams, if all you can pay for and/or access for the market is a battalion size of M4 Medium Tank, it just results you to have a battalion of M4 Medium Tank. I think that it is nothing wrong to replace M1 Abrams to heavy/assault(or even medium) mech and replace M4 Medium Tank to bad light mech.
And, speaking of horse, although there are very niche area that horse is actually better than the car, but the concept of real 'horseback rider' is virtually extinct in the militaries of our era. However, if you are a local militia commander, and can't buy even a jeep, but you can buy(or already have) a bunch of horse, all you can do is utilize the horse, not the tank tactics.
Remember, all you can got is all you can use.
-
I think he was talking about the real Merkava (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava) - although those might have had a recent production run(?)
edit - those make excellent sci-fi looking tanks, though the scale is a bit small for battletech.
-
Oh, the real one? I didn't aware that. Although it doesn't change my point, because it's all the same.
-
edit - those make excellent sci-fi looking tanks, though the scale is a bit small for battletech.
BT scale is too large/bulky... But that's intentional to give people more details to paint. Medium tanks are larger than same scale Abrams... I started playing Micro armor in 1974 and when I saw BT vehicles, they were huge for their tonnage. The same for battlemechs -far too bulky to be just a layer of armor over components, which meant BTU armor was incredibly bulky, like protective styrofoam slabs.
-
Yes but only in certain places and not a continuous line, which hadn't been built with airborne forces in mind.
I thought they had some but they weren't effective. Thanks. :)
The forts could have held (Or at least performed far better). Too much of their garrison was drunk. It was so bad that some were taken by single soldiers.
:o Yikes!
-
Then you may have fallen into my trap. A lance of Locusts could walk backwards from most pursuers and pelt them with volleys of LRMs, often without reply. By the time you decide to run, you may escape if I allow it.
My usual strategy is to place a priority in destroying enemy scout assets, as I consider recon the most vital units of any military force. Many campaigns devolve into regiments stomping around like so many thousand pound gorillas and taking out their recon elements renders one of those gorillas blind. Many players say: "I'll just beeline for my target." That's fine, because if I know that, I can prepare mines, ambushes, pre-plotted artillery points, and all manners of obstacles to buy time for my defenders to turn the target into a death trap. Send out a lance of fast mediums to act as ersatz scouts, and they will be jumped by a company of Lights. Send out a company and a battalion will ambush them.
Campaign operations are never set scenarios, balanced for fairness -the players determine the forces that fight and the player who possesses the most accurate intel often has the initiative and the ability to choose when, where and what forces fight.
Some wargamers make a point to never fight a battle that wasn't already won, so take great pains to stack the deck in their favor. If the fight is fair, somebody screwed up.
The tactic of harassing an opponent is to goad them into making a predictable and often irrational action.
I'm not sending a noticeable part of my force, I'm sending something like a Valkyrie, a stock Locust or even a simple Savannah Master, or maybe two of any of them.
-
People who are used to playing with large formations had better have learned some patience on the way.
-
I'm not sending a noticeable part of my force...
That's the point. You consider your Lights as expendable and trivialize their value. In campaign, my Light assets have greater value than my Heavies and Assaults, as they are my eyes on the bigger picture, and will determine where, when and how I destroy my opponent.
Goading an opponent into committing an irrational action is as old as Light cavalry.
-
But that's because it is RECON, not because it is light mech. Cutting the recon makes the entire unit to lost their eyes and ears, but lost a light in a line battle is no more than a destroyed expendable cheapshot. And recon does not needs sheer strength in frontline; it just need to check the enemy and return alive.
-
If possible I try to make sure that my forces have a unit of fast strikers, preferably with accuracy mod weaponry. Dedicated scout hunters, basically
-
Belgium simply didn't have enough of a military to stop a determined land invasion. They were too small a country.
Then they should have made their country bigger. If the Dutch were able to figure that out, surely the Belgians could have....
-
The Dutch, an eternal bastion against the Nazi tide.... Oh, wait
-
Greyson and Lori before they got other rides, and a few supporting characters. The light guard guys in the warrior trilogy and 'recon company' guys from malicious intent are the ones that immediately came to my mind.
Andrew Redburn, Phelan Kell, Justin Allard, Minobu Tetsuhara and Dan Allard.
-
That's the point. You consider your Lights as expendable and trivialize their value. In campaign, my Light assets have greater value than my Heavies and Assaults, as they are my eyes on the bigger picture, and will determine where, when and how I destroy my opponent.
Goading an opponent into committing an irrational action is as old as Light cavalry.
Finding traps like, mainly be triggering them, is a major reason of why scouts are used.
-
The discussion on Light 'Mechs continues to be interesting, but some of the historical "facts" are hilariously wrong.
There was one isolated case of a bunker being taken by a single German soldier, not a routine situation at all, and the Germans lost quite a few highly trained troops in those operations, even though it was only a tiny fraction of the losses that the fortifications were intended to cause. The French were counting on the Maginot Line to hold long enough for their moderately sizable army to mobilize and meet the invasion head-on, where the heavier French tanks would have demolished the lighter German machines (Lights fighting in a phone booth situation....sound familiar?). From there, they anticipated another trench war. The Germans relied on mobility and "speed" (the family of chemicals, as well as velocity) to advance far faster than the French were able to deal with, and better communications channels and more leeway to interpret orders allowed the Germans to adjust rapidly to changes in the situation, where the French had to wait for requests to go up and orders to come back down the chain of command. French units were outmaneuvered, taken on piecemeal, and destroyed in detail, where a direct head-on confrontation would very likely have favored the French or at least put them on even terms. The situation is exactly WHY real modern armies field small but very significant groups of lighter and faster forces, with a heavy emphasis on individual initiative and communication. Light 'Mechs in BT are only useless (or nearly so) due to a heavily confined and artificial "last man standing" tabletop game situation, where finding the enemy is a given.
BTW - Germany was far from the only country using radios in 1939, and even a small country like Hungary fielded radios in its pitifully few armored vehicles as standard at that time. The vaunted lack of radio communications in Soviet armored units was mainly due to the notorious unreliability of the radios, which were actually installed in all of their T-34 tanks, but rarely functional for long, to the point where usually all but the commander's radio had been cannibalized for parts to keep that single set working, and signal flags had to be used instead.
-
French units were outmaneuvered, taken on piecemeal, and destroyed in detail, where a direct head-on confrontation would very likely have favored the French or at least put them on even terms.
To the point that the few times that French tanks managed to face German tanks head on, the results were largely disastrous for the Germans- Char B1 bis and Somua S35s were capable of slaughtering Panzer Is and Panzer IIs, and there's at least one confirmed instance of a B1 taking more than 140 direct hits from German guns, none of which penetrated, and the tank and its crew survived the battle.
-
The French were counting on the Maginot Line to hold long enough for their moderately sizable army to mobilize and meet the invasion head-on, where the heavier French tanks would have demolished the lighter German machines (Lights fighting in a phone booth situation....sound familiar?). From there, they anticipated another trench war.
The French were still locked in WW1 doctrine. Despite the intel from the invasion of Poland, the French broke up their armor units and used them as infantry support, so you weren't going to have a tank battle as in Kursk. A well-placed, dug in French heavy tank might hold off the tiny MkII, and undergunned MkIII and MkIV Panzers but not for long. It would just be another bunker for artillery or Stukas to smash.
Light 'Mechs in BT are only useless (or nearly so) due to a heavily confined and artificial "last man standing" tabletop game situation, where finding the enemy is a given.
True, that's just an artificiality of a game that reflects its beer and pizza robot arena origins, where fights and ranges were limited to a single, walled off map. I have been wargaming since the 1960s and when I first played BT the players could not explain why the ranges of the weapons were so anemic, when pre-WW1 could be fought at longer ranges, at least until the infantry got to bayonet charge range. Modern warfare battlefield maps could measure in tens of kilometers and use of combined arms a routine practice.
-
Anyway, what's the conclusion then? Light is useless on line battle(especially on small sized pitched combat) but it can be used for some roles that is not expect direct engagements in combat(at least against equal or stronger one) or can be the inferior but cheaper replacement of the other proper line units?
-
Anyway, what's the conclusion then?
Light 'Mechs aren't popular because most people have no clue how to use them. If vehicles could replace Light 'Mechs then vehicles could replace 'Mechs of any weight...but they would still be vehicles.
-
No, it's that light mechs aren't popular because the way the game is played is intentionally not an accurate simulation of an actual military campaign and thus lights don't work as well in the metagame.
-
Anyway, what's the conclusion then?
There is no conclusion, and there never will be. No matter what is said in this thread, some folks will continue to like light mechs, some folks will continue to hate them, and some will continue to possess insufficient emotional investment to make a statement either way.
And every individual will have their own reasons.
And every individual will be right.
And wrong.
-
Perfect. That's the reality, for everyone have their own reasons and situations, so it is nothing wrong to have the different point of view.
But, it seems that it didn't gone so far from the OP, other than lights as the recon asset.
-
For me the conclusions are:
1. There are perfectly justificable reasons for light mechs to be common in the setting.
2. Light mechs are that, light, They are intending for recon and location of the enemy (quite important stuff) and exploitation after you punch a hole in the enemy line. These things are strategic in nature, since playing how your light mech lance murders a column of flatbed trucks or rearguard command post is rather boring on the tabletop, so we do not play them tactically even if it is extremely important in the strategic arena.
3. The phone booth combat of usual tabletop battletech games is harsh on light units, since it is a tactical (not strategic) game and mostly an "OK corral" shooting experience and there staying power and sheer volume of fire tends to trump it all. In this environment lights can still be useful, but is way more difficult to use them well (I wouldn't use them well since I am a casual player, for example), but fast mediums tend to be better for these slugfests.
4. Specialized vehicles operating in their terrain (or outside their unfavoured terrain) and niche role tend to be better than mechs of the same weight in the same role, but mechs are more flexible and absorb damage better. Vehicles can substitute for some of the roles of light mechs, but their fragility makes them less robust to perform these well and perform more than one of them.
It has been a very interesting thread. Thanks all.
Cheers,
Xavi
-
I think that to appreciate an asset, you have to have an honest assessment of its strengths and weaknesses in various settings. It may be fun to field a Commando, but the thing is easy to cut to ribbons in most settings. The Commando is not representative of most lights.
-
3. The phone booth combat of usual tabletop battletech games is harsh on light units, since it is a tactical (not strategic) game and mostly an "OK corral" shooting experience and there staying power and sheer volume of fire tends to trump it all. In this environment lights can still be useful, but is way more difficult to use them well (I wouldn't use them well since I am a casual player, for example), but fast mediums tend to be better for these slugfests.
I agree with points 1, 2, and 4. Point 3 is more conditional, and as you say, it is way more difficult to use them well. That may be part of why I enjoy it. When it fails, it's nothing unexpected, and when it works, and your 20 tonner rips the opponent's expensive toy a new rear exhaust port, it's glorious and memorable. Fast Lights on the tabletop are perfect for picking off stragglers of ANY weight class that wander out of the protective umbrella of the rest of their formation's firepower, forcing the enemy to cluster and make themselves more vulnerable to artillery and other dirty tricks. The Light generally won't win the game for you, but it can very well make it much easier for the rest of your units to win it.
Sadly, I've met several players whose regular response to having to run a Light 'Mech as part of their force is to suicide the Light as quickly as possible, so they have one less thing to deal with.
The problem with Lights in BT goes from relatively situational use in 3025 to a serious issue in 3050, where Pulse weapons tend to negate the only real advantage that Lights have on the tabletop: speed modifiers. The players' expectations for gunnery skills have also increased in the standard pickup games, so the 4/5 skill Regular pilots that constituted 90% of the opposition are now almost matched by the numbers of 3/5 skill Veterans being fielded, and that makes it much harder to avoid being hit. With a 4/5 skill pilot shooting at you, speed = armor. With a 3/5 skill pilot firing a pulse weapon at you, only armor = armor; speed isn't cutting it anymore, and Lights don't have the actual armor to stand up to that kind of abuse for long.
-
That might be is a problem with pulse weapons and BV of skill sets, then.
Cheers,
Xavi
-
“Light mechs” is entirely too broad a category. A Panther is not a Spider, and trying to use them for the same thing is going to go very badly for one of them. Maybe both. I’m very real sense, the Assassin and Cicada are better light mechs than the Panther. At least if you mean what most people mean when they say “light mechs”. Lights have their rolls they can excel in. If you try to use them in roles better suited for assault mechs, they’re generally going to fail. The longer I’ve been around the universe, the more I’ve moved away from tonnage as a meaningful category. Role, speed, and armament mean far more (and role is usually dictated by the other two).
-
“Light mechs” is entirely too broad a category.
It is a defined weight class. That being said, not all are fast, not all have eggshell armor. Not all are recon 'Mechs, although in campaign I played out a scenario where a randomly rolled lance was composed of Lights: 3 fast bugs hampered by an Urbanmech and the GM would not allow the lance to split up or leave the Urbie behind, which doomed that lance, as it was easily run down and slaughtered.
Recon 'Mechs don't have to be Hussars but Hussars make decent recon, while a Mongoose is ideal as a fast command 'Mech that can keep up with just about any formation.
The Panther is more a mobile PPC platform -solid enough to keep Mediums at bay, but certainly not a recon 'Mech.
One has to wonder what niche the Urbanmech fills that can't be filled by a cheaper vehicle with more mobility.
While pulse lasers and targeting computers might negate the speed modifier a fast 'Mech incur, those incur the price of being less efficient at damage to weight ratios. A PPC might be able to severely damage a fast Light but it has to hit first. A MPL might have a better chance to hit the same target but at reduced damage, meaning it may have to connect with a Light several times before striking the same location repeatedly.
As much as I may swear by the Clan LPL, I don't use them to hunt Lights 'Mechs but Assaults. Clan LPLs make up for my movement and terrain modifiers I use to avoid being hit.
-
It is a defined weight class.
True. A "Light" 'Mech is defined as being below 40 tons, regardless of speed, armament, battlefield role, or other factors (aside from the obvious point of being a 'Mech).
It is also true that Light 'Mechs are designed for different roles, either as scouts, scout-hunters, raiders, light support units, and so on, and some of those roles may be shared with heavier machines. That means a 20 ton "bug" may have the same role as a 40 ton Cicada or Assassin, or a 45 ton Phoenix Hawk, while a 30 ton Valkyrie may share a role with a 50 ton Trebuchet or 70 ton Archer. "Light" is insufficient to define a 'Mech's role on the battlefield, but it does strongly impact how much damage a 'Mech can withstand before suffering internal damage and loss of effectiveness. Weight class also affects price and BV, so in some roles or situations one may be quite willing to trade away huge amounts of durability in order to drastically reduce cost. In other situations, not so much.
-
I think I've seen a few conclusions in this thread, depending on who is posting.
1. Light 'Mechs are dead, or at best suboptimal. There are too many fast mediums doing the same job, and too much firepower out there for them to survive.
2. Light 'Mechs are fine because they're cheap. Sometimes that's all the justification you need.
3. Light 'Mechs are fine scouts. This is because they are either disposable (see #2) or faster than even an XL medium can manage (contra #1). But scouting doesn't usually matter in a one-off tactical scenario.
4. You can still build a potent 'Mech-killing light 'Mech with the latest tech, but they aren't many official designs in that mold. (See the spinoff thread (https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=69401.0))
-
I think I've seen a few conclusions in this thread, depending on who is posting.
1. Light 'Mechs are dead, or at best suboptimal. There are too many fast mediums doing the same job, and too much firepower out there for them to survive.
2. Light 'Mechs are fine because they're cheap. Sometimes that's all the justification you need.
3. Light 'Mechs are fine scouts. This is because they are either disposable (see #2) or faster than even an XL medium can manage (contra #1). But scouting doesn't usually matter in a one-off tactical scenario.
4. You can still build a potent 'Mech-killing light 'Mech with the latest tech, but they aren't many official designs in that mold. (See the spinoff thread (https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=69401.0))
1 and 2 are not helped either since the majority of fights are going to use no Tactical Operations rules at all and thus VTOLs really start chipping away at these considerations despite their relative fragility.
This does somewhat impact 3 as well but less so.
Which leaves 4 for most fights where a Light is going to prove itself superior to a VTOL.
Hovers and WiGEs have terrain restrictions that make it a more even debate.
-
I would argue numbers matter more to recon than light Mechs.
I had the pleasure of being put into a Clan vs IS scenario where I had to expend my limited recon assets clearing a defended city while my opponent has the numbers to leave me dug in and go after my DropShips.
Fair play. But when it is 45 assets vs 100 you can use Annihilators for recon.
-
Here's my conclusion.
In the game universe, political concerns prevent leaders from arming huge numbers of civilians. That's a good way to not be in charge anymore. This is true in every civilization in Battletech, so everyone has an incentive to not do that. In addition, there are very effective military counters to fielding waves of infantry and conventional vehicles, so it's not like it would be an instant-win button anyway. Those counters are typically not used very often, because everybody mostly sticks to Battlemechs, but they are available.
There's probably always some limited form of conflict going on in most areas. That's why a lot of old Battletech scenario books had mechs start the game with damage. There's always some jerk with an SRM launcher hiding in the bushes ("There's always a ninja in the closet..."). Vehicles are far more likely to suffer disabling effects from these attacks than Battlemechs are. This means that they'll probably have far lower readiness rates in a real life conflict zone. Yeah you can buy 4 hovercraft for the price of 1 light mech, but once you start using them they won't last that long before you need major repairs. This ends up making mechs more reliable and dependable over the long haul.
Light mechs perform very well in scenarios that aren't covered by standard Battletech rules. In a single mapsheet fight, they are at a disadvantage against heavier opponents. But in a "real life" fight, lights are generally able to avoid situations like that. Playing it out requires gamers interested in using lights though.
-
I've realized something I didn't earlier, so I'm going to say it now. Bug 'Mechs and other 'Mechs like them are like the scout car or jeep in many poorly balanced RTS games, you know the ones, fast, cheap, low down on the tech tree so you can pump a few out early to scout around, but after that you stop using them because their useless. Sure their good against infantry, but most games have anti-vehicle infantry, making them not a good option. Well that that Bug 'Mechs are.
-
I've realized something I didn't earlier, so I'm going to say it now. Bug 'Mechs and other 'Mechs like them are like the scout car or jeep in many poorly balanced RTS games, you know the ones, fast, cheap, low down on the tech tree so you can pump a few out early to scout around, but after that you stop using them because their useless. Sure their good against infantry, but most games have anti-vehicle infantry, making them not a good option. Well that that Bug 'Mechs are.
Not quite. The light scout car or jeep is fine for recon, until the enemy starts fielding a couple of squads of cheap SRM infantry. The 20 ton bug 'Mech will continue to be useful for recon, because the SRMs won't generally immobilize it or take it out in one round of fire. The problems are that recon isn't necessary on a battlefield of the size used in a typical tabletop game, and that you don't need to spread recon assets out far and wide, because even a campaign game with a large strategic map is severely limited in scope compared to a real-world conflict that might span hundreds or thousands of miles of front, with hundreds or thousands of units engaging in recon or other activities.
In real world navies up until the end of WWII, they typically fielded far more Destroyers and Light Cruisers than Battleships. A Battleship is a huge investment, but that massive amount of armor and firepower is only justified if you're fighting another capital ship. In most situations, the light escort vessel has sufficient firepower to handles things on its own, for a tiny fraction of the cost and maintenance, so you can field several Destroyers to cover a wider area or several distant areas, instead of one Battleship that can only be in one place at a time. If you bump into something that you're not able to handle, you use your speed to get out of harm's way and call in a Battleship, which is free to respond because it's not forced to take on the more routine duties that a Destroyer can do. Light 'Mechs in Battletech are like those Destroyers: quite capable of carrying out routine operations until something big comes to play hardball. That's when they call in the heavyweights to do the serious fighting, while offering whatever support they can, so their heavyweights are more likely to win.
A real military using 'Mechs would have a LOT of Light 'Mechs, vehicles, and infantry for various routine scouting and raiding functions, and a few Heavies to duke it out with the opposing Heavies when needed. The small maps and player knowledge of the battlefield and opposing forces makes recon less important or pointless in most games. The close distances, higher gunnery skills, and later era weapons that increase the odds of hitting fast targets make Light 'Mechs relatively useless in purely Tactical games. Still, a fast Light 'Mech can sometimes make use of an opportunity to backstab a far heavier design and come out relatively unscathed, so they're not entirely useless in spite of so many things working against them. I do have issues with the proliferation of better gunnery skills: if everyone is "Veteran", why do they call regulars "Regular"? Clan pulse weapons with extended ranges and targeting computers, in combination with better skills, further complicate matters, making Lights far too vulnerable at any range whenever Clan units are involved. It makes for a faster game, yes, but anything that's not massively armored tends to evaporate.
-
I'm wondering if light mechs need a buff. I know most people think they don't.
Simple buff: -2 to hit light mechs. -1 to hit medium mechs. Reasoning is they are small and unusually agile and bendy. This is what they did in HBS' turn based BattleTech game.
I can say it didn't save light mechs: by endgame, they were relegated by everything else.
I can say it won't make light mechs awesome. Because folks could still take a heavy with Pulses and negate that advantage. But it would give them something. Otherwise, anything not moving 12/18 or thereabouts just isn't fast enough to stay alive.
I'll put my flameproof suit on now.
-
I've realized something I didn't earlier, so I'm going to say it now. Bug 'Mechs and other 'Mechs like them are like the scout car or jeep in many poorly balanced RTS games, you know the ones, fast, cheap, low down on the tech tree so you can pump a few out early to scout around, but after that you stop using them because their useless. Sure their good against infantry, but most games have anti-vehicle infantry, making them not a good option. Well that that Bug 'Mechs are.
I have to ask, when was the last time you actually tried sending a Stinger or Locust against infantry? Pretty sure that as long as you're not in a city or talking about the crazy Clantech platoons or going up against someone who thinks a field gun is a standard-issue sidearm, they'll still prove quite effective.
-
Not quite. The light scout car or jeep is fine for recon, until the enemy starts fielding a couple of squads of cheap SRM infantry. The 20 ton bug 'Mech will continue to be useful for recon, because the SRMs won't generally immobilize it or take it out in one round of fire. The problems are that recon isn't necessary on a battlefield of the size used in a typical tabletop game, and that you don't need to spread recon assets out far and wide, because even a campaign game with a large strategic map is severely limited in scope compared to a real-world conflict that might span hundreds or thousands of miles of front, with hundreds or thousands of units engaging in recon or other activities.
The Jeep I am talking about here is NOT a BT unit, and I'm not sure how you came to the collusion that it was. It's a generic RTS unit, if it were to have BT stats I'd say it'd have at least 20 armor on each location, move 5/8 and be armed with a machine gun or two, it'd also cost half of a Rommel or Patton to play
In real world navies up until the end of WWII, they typically fielded far more Destroyers and Light Cruisers than Battleships. A Battleship is a huge investment, but that massive amount of armor and firepower is only justified if you're fighting another capital ship. In most situations, the light escort vessel has sufficient firepower to handles things on its own, for a tiny fraction of the cost and maintenance, so you can field several Destroyers to cover a wider area or several distant areas, instead of one Battleship that can only be in one place at a time. If you bump into something that you're not able to handle, you use your speed to get out of harm's way and call in a Battleship, which is free to respond because it's not forced to take on the more routine duties that a Destroyer can do. Light 'Mechs in Battletech are like those Destroyers: quite capable of carrying out routine operations until something big comes to play hardball. That's when they call in the heavyweights to do the serious fighting, while offering whatever support they can, so their heavyweights are more likely to win.
A real military using 'Mechs would have a LOT of Light 'Mechs, vehicles, and infantry for various routine scouting and raiding functions, and a few Heavies to duke it out with the opposing Heavies when needed. The small maps and player knowledge of the battlefield and opposing forces makes recon less important or pointless in most games. The close distances, higher gunnery skills, and later era weapons that increase the odds of hitting fast targets make Light 'Mechs relatively useless in purely Tactical games. Still, a fast Light 'Mech can sometimes make use of an opportunity to backstab a far heavier design and come out relatively unscathed, so they're not entirely useless in spite of so many things working against them. I do have issues with the proliferation of better gunnery skills: if everyone is "Veteran", why do they call regulars "Regular"? Clan pulse weapons with extended ranges and targeting computers, in combination with better skills, further complicate matters, making Lights far too vulnerable at any range whenever Clan units are involved. It makes for a faster game, yes, but anything that's not massively armored tends to evaporate.
Doesn't work that way, the resources needed to build a 'Mech, as evidenced by their in-universe sacristy, in addition the the lore, mean that any 'Mech is comparable to a BB in your example in therms of cost.
I have to ask, when was the last time you actually tried sending a Stinger or Locust against infantry? Pretty sure that as long as you're not in a city or talking about the crazy Clantech platoons or going up against someone who thinks a field gun is a standard-issue sidearm, they'll still prove quite effective.
Wasn't talking about a Locust or Stinger here, was talking about my generic jeep.
-
Mech sacristy has been thrown to the wind for a hundred years of background. It is 3rd SW thing, but not anymore in 4th SW where they are just tanks with a crew of 1 guy in the big plot. Replaceable commodities.
-
I'm wondering if light mechs need a buff. I know most people think they don't.
Simple buff: -2 to hit light mechs. -1 to hit medium mechs. Reasoning is they are small and unusually agile and bendy. This is what they did in HBS' turn based BattleTech game.
The problem with that solution is that anything which ISN'T a Clan Pulse boat won't be able to hit them at all, but a Clan pulse boat with elite pilot and targeting computer will still take them down easily. Two Lights dancing around for advantage would never land a shot. Pulse weapons SHOULD have gotten a -1, not a -2, and there really should have been some kind of tournament restriction on the percentage of high-skill gunners you can field, such as having at least as much 'Mech tonnage or BV piloted by Greens as Veterans, with at least 50% of the force being Regulars. That wouldn't apply to scenarios, but would provide a guideline for a "normal" situation.
In the HBS game, misses remove chevrons, so even if you can't hit that Light, you shoot at it anyway so your lance-mates will be able to hit it when their turns come up. Very unrealistic, and unfair to the side that's badly outnumbered. Of course, the AI is incompetent enough that it can't fully exploit its advantage, otherwise it would wipe the floor with the player's single lance in most of the missions.
I recall one tournament where everyone took 2 or 3 gunnery skill and 6 or 7 in piloting, with everyone in an Assault or high-end Heavy. Every round, nobody moved unless they absolutely had to, almost every shot hit, then half the 'Mechs would fall down when they failed their piloting skill checks. It was disgusting, with no "tactics" involved after initial deployment; just a die-rolling contest to see who ran out of armor and internal structure first.
The underlying cause of the problem is that a 2D6 roll makes a +1 modifier very significant, and you can quickly stack a few such modifiers to turn an "easy" shot into an "impossible" one. A 2D8 or 2D10 system, or 3D6, would have allowed a bit finer granularity of effects, but that wouldn't have fit the simple "beer and pretzels" style of game that the original developers intended.
-
Another possible way to interpret this thread is that everyone is playing matches with BV constraints that are too high.
If you cut the BV constraints substantially, you're going to have to pick smaller units, or field a very small force. That means games will actually go faster, since many light mechs still pack substantial firepower (e.g. wolfhound, panther, jenner) and can hit another light mech hard.
This might be more fun than lances of heavies and assaults shambling towards one another and chipping off 10+ tons of armor.
-
An average planetary invasion would probably include an enormous number of battles that are far too boring to play out on the tabletop. Nobody wants to play the grand battle of infantry platoon #1 vs infantry platoon #2. That's why Battletroops failed.
However in an actual war, those fights would be incredibly common. That would be 99% of all battles. And that's where bug mechs shine. They're tough enough that they can annihilate a standard infantry platoon and still have a little armor left. Then they return to base and get armor repair, then go back out again.
Would a conventional vehicle work in the same situation? Sure, but they're a lot more vulnerable to motive hits and lucky criticals. Over the course of a long campaign, that adds up. Plus a lot of light mechs can jump.
-
Mech sacristy has been thrown to the wind for a hundred years of background. It is 3rd SW thing, but not anymore in 4th SW where they are just tanks with a crew of 1 guy in the big plot. Replaceable commodities.
With the exception of the CC the Great Houses now have fewer regiments then they did at the start of the 4SW.
The underlying cause of the problem is that a 2D6 roll makes a +1 modifier very significant, and you can quickly stack a few such modifiers to turn an "easy" shot into an "impossible" one. A 2D8 or 2D10 system, or 3D6, would have allowed a bit finer granularity of effects, but that wouldn't have fit the simple "beer and pretzels" style of game that the original developers intended.
3D6 is less swingy then the other options, and 2D10 is what MW3 used, so I vote for that. Interestingly this actually makes campaign play a bit better, as improvements are more gradual, I'd also suggest splitting skills up more.
To stop people from just buying up higher grade Pilots, I'd suggest taking a page out of SITS and making people ROLL for their Pilot's skill levels.
Another possible way to interpret this thread is that everyone is playing matches with BV constraints that are too high.
If you cut the BV constraints substantially, you're going to have to pick smaller units, or field a very small force. That means games will actually go faster, since many light mechs still pack substantial firepower (e.g. wolfhound, panther, jenner) and can hit another light mech hard.
This might be more fun than lances of heavies and assaults shambling towards one another and chipping off 10+ tons of armor.
This is a terrible idea, it's encouraging one style of play over other's one that apparently not very popular.
An average planetary invasion would probably include an enormous number of battles that are far too boring to play out on the tabletop. Nobody wants to play the grand battle of infantry platoon #1 vs infantry platoon #2. That's why Battletroops failed.
However in an actual war, those fights would be incredibly common. That would be 99% of all battles. And that's where bug mechs shine. They're tough enough that they can annihilate a standard infantry platoon and still have a little armor left. Then they return to base and get armor repair, then go back out again.
Would a conventional vehicle work in the same situation? Sure, but they're a lot more vulnerable to motive hits and lucky criticals. Over the course of a long campaign, that adds up. Plus a lot of light mechs can jump.
Vehicles take more motive crits, but those are easy to fix, bug 'Mechs taking heavy damage are not.
-
With the exception of the CC the Great Houses now have fewer regiments then they did at the start of the 4SW.
3D6 is less swingy then the other options, and 2D10 is what MW3 used, so I vote for that. Interestingly this actually makes campaign play a bit better, as improvements are more gradual, I'd also suggest splitting skills up more.
To stop people from just buying up higher grade Pilots, I'd suggest taking a page out of SITS and making people ROLL for their Pilot's skill levels.
This is a terrible idea, it's encouraging one style of play over other's one that apparently not very popular.
Vehicles take more motive crits, but those are easy to fix, bug 'Mechs taking heavy damage are not.
I don’t see how encouraging a particular style of play, even a less used one, is a bad thing, and regardless it’s not as if anyone’s suggesting that people be forced to use less BV. It’s merely a suggestion for how to run games that allow for light mechs to have a place. Might not be the best way to do it, but not because it’s inherently bad to run smaller games.
-
I've said before (maybe in this thread, maybe elsewhere) that the Battletech rules are not wholly representative of the "reality" of war in the Battletech universe.
Alpha Strike takes the same units and presents them in a different format, with different game rules, and different points of balance. So does Battleforce. So do the Solaris rules. So does Battletroops. The "reality" of combat is maybe somewhere in between all of those. Whatever that reality is (represented by some unwritten system that we haven't quite nailed yet), light mechs are totally worth it there. The fact that their value doesn't come across in one particular set of game rules, doesn't mean they aren't good. It just means the games we are playing don't quite get the balance perfectly accurate.
A MASH unit has great value in a real war. So do fuel trucks, ammo trucks, and coolant trucks. On the tabletop, those units are virtually useless. They exist in the game because they're the sort of things that exist in real life. But at the scale of the game as commonly played, they don't act as anything other than a target. That's fine. We don't have to play LogisticsTech where those units come into their own. It's enough to simply recognize why they are there.
-
Vehicles take more motive crits, but those are easy to fix, bug 'Mechs taking heavy damage are not.
I have a philosophy about vehicles in Battletech, and why we don't see them as much as you might think. This is purely my own head-canon, so you are free to disagree. You won't hurt my feelings.
I'm an old school D&D player. I don't know if they still have it, but they used to have a set of "wandering monster" tables. As you walked around the countryside, there was a chance you'd get attacked by a group of orcs. Or maybe a dragon. Or an ogre, or whatever. You'd roll on the table and see what happened. One time our party got attacked by a pack of bears. I think the GM kind of screwed us on that one.
Anyway, Dragon Magazine published a joke article, with a "wandering damage" table. Rather than bother with monsters, you could cut out the middleman and just take damage. Guys at our store thought it was funny and adopted the term.
My philosophy is that, in any sort of prolonged Battletech conflict (not an objective raid, but really any kind of planetary invasion or long-term occupation), you would encounter wandering damage pretty regularly. This sort of thing would be a fact of life in Battletech warfare. Much of this philosophy probably also stems from playing Crescent Hawks Inception a lot when I was a teenager, when there was no shortage of random jerks with SRM launchers popping up and shooting at you for no reason (in the game, not in the 90s), as well as old Battletech supplements where mechs always had some lingering damage on them.
Maybe some partisans planted a roadside bomb. Take two 5 point hits on the side chart (mechs take hits on kick chart). Or maybe an infantry squad is hidden in that building with an AC-5 field gun, and they will open fire when you get into medium range (you get no target movement modifier because you don't think you're in combat and you aren't trying to evade). Or perhaps some guys with SRM inferno launchers have set up in that alleyway and are waiting for you to pass by. Or somebody rigged up explosives on the bridge and are going to collapse it when you go over. Or whatever.
Ambushes like this would not normally be powerful enough to completely destroy a unit. You're basically looking at some guys who take a pot-shot and then run away. In an instance like that, they are far more likely to cause serious damage to a vehicle than they are a mech. And these sorts of attacks would happen all the time. That's why you would want light mechs. They're a lot less likely to get immobilized than a vehicle (which would then be dead as the ambushers run back to finish it off). And on the off chance that they get lucky and get a through-armor-critical and put 3 engine hits on you, well losing a light mech is a lot better than losing a heavy.
-
Actually, here's a question: can non-superheavy mechs be carried as regular Dropship cargo? Obviously that takes time to unpack and you probably can't do as much or any maintenance in transit, but can you do it? Because if you can, then the issue of Mech bays only fitting 1 can be significantly less relevant. You might only use said bays for units that are going to face combat almost immediately, while cargo space is used for the rest. In such cases, you could carry more light mechs for a given amount of cargo, which puts them on more even footing with conventional vehicles, and gives them more applications. If you could carry 5 Locusts in cargo for every Atlas, it becomes a lot easier to justify why you would choose to do so.
-
Actually, here's a question: can non-superheavy mechs be carried as regular Dropship cargo?
Yes, but cargoed mechs are typically only ones that are being sent to the factory or off to New Avalon for use at the NAIS. You don't put mechs in cargo space to send them somewhere you're planning to fight. That space is used to store ammo, armor, and replacement parts.
-
Yes, but cargoed mechs are typically only ones that are being sent to the factory or off to New Avalon for use at the NAIS. You don't put mechs in cargo space to send them somewhere you're planning to fight. That space is used to store ammo, armor, and replacement parts.
Perhaps it's not standard procedure, but it doesn't seem like a bad idea on the face of it. A standard Mech bay weighs 150 tons (if I'm not mistaken, having a mech inside doesn't add to that weight? If it does then that bay is even heavier), so if you chose to carry your mechs as cargo, you'd be saving at minimum 50 tons per mech assuming they were 100 tons. If you're hauling 20 ton mechs, you're saving a whopping 130 tons per mech, which is a massive improvement. It also allows you to use more general transports to carry reinforcements for long campaigns.
-
A leopard can carry 150*6=900 tons of mechs I stead of 400 of you pack it as cargo. Same with the other dropships (storage physics be damned), so if you can secure the drop area for a while AND carry the necessary techs to unload the mechs, it might not be a bad move if you plan to stay around for a while. For example because you are invading I stead of raiding.
-
This is standard procedure in my gaming RPG group. The players store conventional fighters and 1 or 2 mechs as cargo, be keep 3 mechs ready for action. Sometimes 3 light vehicles as well in the 4th bay. Or more cargo.
-
The fiction has plenty of instances of dropships carrying more mechs than they’re rated for. Presumably at least some of those were stored as cargo and they didn’t mind taking the extra time to ready them once they got there. There are also cases of units traveling in DropShips that either have no mech bays, or not enough mech bays for their force, so they either have to have been stored in cargo or else the droppers refitted with extra mech bays, which may not be easy. Is it anyone’s SOP? Maybe, but only if you’re a unit that only does garrison work and never has to hot-drop. Or you captured a Mule and have to make do.
-
Thinking about it more, even outside the mechs-packed-as-cargo idea, there could still be notable advantages to having a light in a mech bay as opposed to an assault, though this stretches into non-mechanical areas of the game. While one can only fit one mech per bay, presumably, that spare tonnage is still used for something. Even if a lot of the bay is devoted to structure and essential equipment, there's gotta be things like spare parts and other mech supplies, too. Whereas a 100-tonner might only leave enough space for the bare essentials, putting a 50-tonner in a bay might leave enough for spare myomer, replacement armor panels, even entire extra limbs and body sections. All the stuff you might need on a prolonged campaign. A mech bay fitted for a 20-tonner might have enough room for spares to make two or three whole mechs with.
So a mech bay fitted for an Assault mech might only have the supplies to keep that mech running for a few weeks of campaigning, while a bay fitted for a light could keep it running for years. Of course, you can always carry more spares as cargo, but a light mech will still likely require less tonnage in spares.
-
The fiction already mentions techs doing that, regardless of whether the mech bay is holding a Stinger or an Atlas.
But there's the Small/Narrow Profile quirk that lets you stick two light or medium mechs with that quirk into a single mech bay.
-
The fiction already mentions techs doing that, regardless of whether the mech bay is holding a Stinger or an Atlas.
But there's the Small/Narrow Profile quirk that lets you stick two light or medium mechs with that quirk into a single mech bay.
Yeah, my main point is that a light mech leaves more room for said supplies, which is only compounded by the lesser amount of cargo space required for additional spares. It makes perfect sense for a light to get more out of those extras, since there's more room for them in the first place.
The Compact Mech quirk is also relevant, I just didn't consider it something specific to light mechs, since mediums can have it too.
-
There probably isn't actually that much difference in how much stuff you can cram into a cubical that's occupied by an Urbanmech instead of an Awesome. That's because you have to have the ability to deal with the stuff when you get to your destination. Literally filling the cubical to the brim is really not a great idea- remember that this a dropship that's traveling through space. A mech cubical, unlike a cargo area, isn't designed to hold a bunch of crates, so stacking it up to the top creates a hazard. And that's on top of the fact that you really don't want to have all your mechs blocked in by spare parts: either you're going to going into combat quickly and you really don't want to have to deal with a cluttered workspace that will inhibit your ability to get your mech off the ship and into the fight. Or you're going someplace where you're not expecting combat right away, in which case you probably have the time to ship the extra stuff separately.
-
There probably isn't actually that much difference in how much stuff you can cram into a cubical that's occupied by an Urbanmech instead of an Awesome. That's because you have to have the ability to deal with the stuff when you get to your destination. Literally filling the cubical to the brim is really not a great idea- remember that this a dropship that's traveling through space. A mech cubical, unlike a cargo area, isn't designed to hold a bunch of crates, so stacking it up to the top creates a hazard. And that's on top of the fact that you really don't want to have all your mechs blocked in by spare parts: either you're going to going into combat quickly and you really don't want to have to deal with a cluttered workspace that will inhibit your ability to get your mech off the ship and into the fight. Or you're going someplace where you're not expecting combat right away, in which case you probably have the time to ship the extra stuff separately.
You can go the US Navy route and lash spares to the underside of the "roof". It's a good way to stow stuff that you won't need to use right away, while keeping it clear of everything else. When you need it (ie, once you've cleared the landing zone and started setting up things outside the dropship), you can use cranes and other equipment to get it down. You can also use any permanent walls (ie, not doors) to attach things.
-
There probably isn't actually that much difference in how much stuff you can cram into a cubical that's occupied by an Urbanmech instead of an Awesome. That's because you have to have the ability to deal with the stuff when you get to your destination. Literally filling the cubical to the brim is really not a great idea- remember that this a dropship that's traveling through space. A mech cubical, unlike a cargo area, isn't designed to hold a bunch of crates, so stacking it up to the top creates a hazard. And that's on top of the fact that you really don't want to have all your mechs blocked in by spare parts: either you're going to going into combat quickly and you really don't want to have to deal with a cluttered workspace that will inhibit your ability to get your mech off the ship and into the fight. Or you're going someplace where you're not expecting combat right away, in which case you probably have the time to ship the extra stuff separately.
Stacking? No, just attach the containers to the gantry, it is designed to handle 100 tons of mass just make use of that.
-
This is one of those areas where FASAhysics runs into problems- the volume of the typical DS makes the insides so wide open the crew can spend their days swinging cats without out worrying about harming the cats. Which means no reason exists to make each mechbay cubicle with its gantries into a mech shaped coffin.
Throw on top of that each mech cubicle would have to cover the volume of the biggest mech in each direction (height/ width/depth) means they cannot make such a cubicle 'small' . . . it has to fit the depth of a quad (twice the depth of a bipedal mech?), height of the tallest design, and the width of something like a Stone Rhino.
Now you might not be able to make them interchangeable when you are acting like a WWII sub going on patrol- IE walking on cases of canned food and eating your way into the showers- since the 'spare' volume of a Commando is going to be different than a Devastator or Goliath.
-
I don’t see how encouraging a particular style of play, even a less used one, is a bad thing, and regardless it’s not as if anyone’s suggesting that people be forced to use less BV. It’s merely a suggestion for how to run games that allow for light mechs to have a place. Might not be the best way to do it, but not because it’s inherently bad to run smaller games.
Because to encourage the unpopular way of play you have to discourage the popular ones, and that's going to kill your game.
I have a philosophy about vehicles in Battletech, and why we don't see them as much as you might think. This is purely my own head-canon, so you are free to disagree. You won't hurt my feelings.
I'm an old school D&D player. I don't know if they still have it, but they used to have a set of "wandering monster" tables. As you walked around the countryside, there was a chance you'd get attacked by a group of orcs. Or maybe a dragon. Or an ogre, or whatever. You'd roll on the table and see what happened. One time our party got attacked by a pack of bears. I think the GM kind of screwed us on that one.
Anyway, Dragon Magazine published a joke article, with a "wandering damage" table. Rather than bother with monsters, you could cut out the middleman and just take damage. Guys at our store thought it was funny and adopted the term.
My philosophy is that, in any sort of prolonged Battletech conflict (not an objective raid, but really any kind of planetary invasion or long-term occupation), you would encounter wandering damage pretty regularly. This sort of thing would be a fact of life in Battletech warfare. Much of this philosophy probably also stems from playing Crescent Hawks Inception a lot when I was a teenager, when there was no shortage of random jerks with SRM launchers popping up and shooting at you for no reason (in the game, not in the 90s), as well as old Battletech supplements where mechs always had some lingering damage on them.
Maybe some partisans planted a roadside bomb. Take two 5 point hits on the side chart (mechs take hits on kick chart). Or maybe an infantry squad is hidden in that building with an AC-5 field gun, and they will open fire when you get into medium range (you get no target movement modifier because you don't think you're in combat and you aren't trying to evade). Or perhaps some guys with SRM inferno launchers have set up in that alleyway and are waiting for you to pass by. Or somebody rigged up explosives on the bridge and are going to collapse it when you go over. Or whatever.
Ambushes like this would not normally be powerful enough to completely destroy a unit. You're basically looking at some guys who take a pot-shot and then run away. In an instance like that, they are far more likely to cause serious damage to a vehicle than they are a mech. And these sorts of attacks would happen all the time. That's why you would want light mechs. They're a lot less likely to get immobilized than a vehicle (which would then be dead as the ambushers run back to finish it off). And on the off chance that they get lucky and get a through-armor-critical and put 3 engine hits on you, well losing a light mech is a lot better than losing a heavy.
There's so much wrong here, but skipping over the D&D stuff to the BT stuff. A damage system like you describe is more likely to immobilize a 'Mech then it then it is a vehicle, at least one it comes to Bug 'Mechs, which is what would be used, and if it's a vehicle fixing means the crew takes an hour to change some tyres or something, if it's the 'Mech, well you're calling for a recovery vehicle.
And all of that ignores the fact that taking and holding terrain is the job of infantry, not 'Mechs or tanks, always has been always will be and using something else to do that job is not a good idea.
Thinking about it more, even outside the mechs-packed-as-cargo idea, there could still be notable advantages to having a light in a mech bay as opposed to an assault, though this stretches into non-mechanical areas of the game. While one can only fit one mech per bay, presumably, that spare tonnage is still used for something. Even if a lot of the bay is devoted to structure and essential equipment, there's gotta be things like spare parts and other mech supplies, too. Whereas a 100-tonner might only leave enough space for the bare essentials, putting a 50-tonner in a bay might leave enough for spare myomer, replacement armor panels, even entire extra limbs and body sections. All the stuff you might need on a prolonged campaign. A mech bay fitted for a 20-tonner might have enough room for spares to make two or three whole mechs with.
So a mech bay fitted for an Assault mech might only have the supplies to keep that mech running for a few weeks of campaigning, while a bay fitted for a light could keep it running for years. Of course, you can always carry more spares as cargo, but a light mech will still likely require less tonnage in spares.
Won't work, the cargo will stop the 'Mech from getting out quickly and easily, which is the point of the bay.
-
Because to encourage the unpopular way of play you have to discourage the popular ones, and that's going to kill your game.
There's so much wrong here, but skipping over the D&D stuff to the BT stuff. A damage system like you describe is more likely to immobilize a 'Mech then it then it is a vehicle, at least one it comes to Bug 'Mechs, which is what would be used, and if it's a vehicle fixing means the crew takes an hour to change some tyres or something, if it's the 'Mech, well you're calling for a recovery vehicle.
And all of that ignores the fact that taking and holding terrain is the job of infantry, not 'Mechs or tanks, always has been always will be and using something else to do that job is not a good idea.
Won't work, the cargo will stop the 'Mech from getting out quickly and easily, which is the point of the bay.
For the first point, I don't think that's really much of a concern for the individual players that would be applying this setup. I don't think the suggestion was for CGL to come down from the heavens and mandate people to use lower BV caps, just for people to try things in their own games. If a group doesn't like the lower BV cap, then they can just play with a higher one next game. No one's going to quit Battletech because they played a low-BV game once. If anything, low-BV games are a good stepping stone to learn the ropes, and less likely to overwhelm a new or less mechanically-inclined player.
As for bay space, we've gone over that. There are plenty of ways to fit spare parts that don't require boxing in your mechs. Attach crates to the roof, hold spare parts on the gantries, mount racks and extra equipment on the walls. Those bays are positively cavernous compared to what real-world militaries manage on a regular basis in facilities like aircraft carriers. A 20-tonner in a bay capable of holding a 100-tonner is going to have room to spare.
-
Won't work, the cargo will stop the 'Mech from getting out quickly and easily, which is the point of the bay.
This is one of those areas where FASAhysics runs into problems- the volume of the typical DS makes the insides so wide open the crew can spend their days swinging cats without out worrying about harming the cats. Which means no reason exists to make each mechbay cubicle with its gantries into a mech shaped coffin.
Throw on top of that each mech cubicle would have to cover the volume of the biggest mech in each direction (height/ width/depth) means they cannot make such a cubicle 'small' . . . it has to fit the depth of a quad (twice the depth of a bipedal mech?), height of the tallest design, and the width of something like a Stone Rhino.
Now you might not be able to make them interchangeable when you are acting like a WWII sub going on patrol- IE walking on cases of canned food and eating your way into the showers- since the 'spare' volume of a Commando is going to be different than a Devastator or Goliath.
Load-planning is going to keep it functional.
(https://i0.wp.com/i.imgur.com/rS2huMT.jpg)
I have been on Chinooks, C-130s and amphibs with cargo loaded. Nooks & crannies always exist- FREX look up air-dropped humvees, you can see extra wood and sometimes other cargo on the pallets under the vehicles. Some of the old paper load plan stuff you can find on the internet even has the cargo area of a C-130 done in what looks like 1ft blocks so the loadmaster & crew can mark out what will be taken up.
So the comment about strapping down spare myomer bundle on the gantry from the roof down to 1 ft would work for about any mech . . . but you are going to be able to put more on that upper portion of the gantry frame with a Commando compared to taller assault mechs.
-
At this point we could be getting into fan rules to determine what fraction of available tonnage in a Mech gantry can be used for cargo before it provides a penalty to Mech maintenance/repair/operations
-
I always felt mech/fighter bays gained more "common" area as you added more bays.
2 mech bays has a limited hanger/transfer zone, while having 12 mech bays would allow you to really shuffle them around as needed during transit. Just like crew quarters having a common area.
Either way, the rules keep it simple: here's your tonnage, fluff as you'd like (well the 2nd part I added).
-
For the first point, I don't think that's really much of a concern for the individual players that would be applying this setup. I don't think the suggestion was for CGL to come down from the heavens and mandate people to use lower BV caps, just for people to try things in their own games. If a group doesn't like the lower BV cap, then they can just play with a higher one next game. No one's going to quit Battletech because they played a low-BV game once. If anything, low-BV games are a good stepping stone to learn the ropes, and less likely to overwhelm a new or less mechanically-inclined player.
People don't play games alone, they play them in groups, so those groups have to come to an agreement to force size, and if there are several groups in an area or city that people might want to move between may well want to all use the same size, and ideally CGL is setting a standard game size so that if I'm in a different city, region, or even country I can bring a force I would play with my normal group without any problem. This topic came up recently in another thread.
For the idea that lower BV forces might help new players, that's more of a maybe, dropping from 4 Thuds a side to 2 Thuds a side might help a little bit, but what is more useful there is the reduction in playtime, new players are slower then veteran ones, they need more time to plot out their moves, all that sort of stuff. Now going from 4 Thuds a side to a 4 Wasps a side dance-fight doesn't help, in fact it might make things worse, light 'Mechs are a lot harder to use then other 'Mechs, it's a skill that most players probably don't develop, either from lack of interest or lack of time.
I always felt mech/fighter bays gained more "common" area as you added more bays.
This! 'Mech bays, and all other bays, carry not just he 'Mech, but also provide basic quarters for the crew (potentially almost 30 people for Super-Heavy Vee's), maintenance equipment including gantry, and in the case of 'Mechs and ASF, launch equipment. A 'Mech being carried in a bay is not like a tank being carried on an plane across the Atlantic, but more like a fighter being carried on a carrier, that 150 tons is so that it can quickly and easily be unload and sent into the fight.
-
People don't play games alone, they play them in groups, so those groups have to come to an agreement to force size, and if there are several groups in an area or city that people might want to move between may well want to all use the same size, and ideally CGL is setting a standard game size so that if I'm in a different city, region, or even country I can bring a force I would play with my normal group without any problem. This topic came up recently in another thread.
For the idea that lower BV forces might help new players, that's more of a maybe, dropping from 4 Thuds a side to 2 Thuds a side might help a little bit, but what is more useful there is the reduction in playtime, new players are slower then veteran ones, they need more time to plot out their moves, all that sort of stuff. Now going from 4 Thuds a side to a 4 Wasps a side dance-fight doesn't help, in fact it might make things worse, light 'Mechs are a lot harder to use then other 'Mechs, it's a skill that most players probably don't develop, either from lack of interest or lack of time.
This! 'Mech bays, and all other bays, carry not just he 'Mech, but also provide basic quarters for the crew (potentially almost 30 people for Super-Heavy Vee's), maintenance equipment including gantry, and in the case of 'Mechs and ASF, launch equipment. A 'Mech being carried in a bay is not like a tank being carried on an plane across the Atlantic, but more like a fighter being carried on a carrier, that 150 tons is so that it can quickly and easily be unload and sent into the fight.
Well, going by your example at least, while I'm not sure ~1500 BV is the way to go (since that straight-up prevents use of many assault mechs), nothing stops a novice player from deploying one or two bigger mechs under that BV limit. Especially for one mech, that keeps things far simpler, since you just need to manage that single unit.
And using the aircraft carrier example, have you seen how much they manage to pack into that tiny space? Using carrier methodology only reinforces my point. Every spare nook and cranny is used to the fullest. And compared to a modern carrier, dropship internal spaces are positively cavernous for what they contain. While yes, you need clear through-ways for mechs to move, there is still room. If the mech bay can accommodate an Atlas and the requisite equipment to service said Atlas, then that mech bay can be reconfigured to fit a Locust and have enough space left over to do all the same and fit some extra stuff in there.
-
I've done A big mech VS an equal BV of small mechs a few times, and the small mechs typically win if well selected.
Royal locust are fun. Just wear a rictus grin the entire time to get in the right mindset...
-
Has there been any discussion of Clan tech lights yet? It's only one group, and clan is of course way stronger, but how do light mechs fare there? Because my impression was that you could do quite a bit.
-XL engines are both prevalent and less vulnerable, with a side torso loss being bad, but not an instant kill.
-Compact and efficient weight-saving tech for armor and structure frees up further mass.
-Lightweight, but very powerful weaponry is available, and you get the same 10 free DHS that everyone else gets, allowing you to choose hot-running options.
The only thing working against lights here is the presence of longer-ranged Pulse Lasers and generally better pilots.
I know my forays into Clantech with SSW were pretty fruitful. You can build a 30-tonner 10/15 quad with max armor and 7 tons of weaponry. That's enough for an ERPPC or ER Large Laser, both weapons that really allow you to play the ranges and kite. Couple that with going prone every turn, trying to nab partial cover whenever possible, and you can stay really hard to hit while throwing out hefty punches of your own. It becomes a lot dicier to chase after scouts when they can deal out 15-point hits, or strike from 25 hexes away.
-
Well, going by your example at least, while I'm not sure ~1500 BV is the way to go (since that straight-up prevents use of many assault mechs), nothing stops a novice player from deploying one or two bigger mechs under that BV limit. Especially for one mech, that keeps things far simpler, since you just need to manage that single unit.
And using the aircraft carrier example, have you seen how much they manage to pack into that tiny space? Using carrier methodology only reinforces my point. Every spare nook and cranny is used to the fullest. And compared to a modern carrier, dropship internal spaces are positively cavernous for what they contain. While yes, you need clear through-ways for mechs to move, there is still room. If the mech bay can accommodate an Atlas and the requisite equipment to service said Atlas, then that mech bay can be reconfigured to fit a Locust and have enough space left over to do all the same and fit some extra stuff in there.
*Sigh* Let me make it clearer, what you're proposing is the equivalent of the aircraft movement corridors and flight deck of a carrier being used to store cargo, it's not going to work out.
And I don't know where you got 1,500 BV from, I'm against using 4 Wasp's, not for it.
-
*Sigh* Let me make it clearer, what you're proposing is the equivalent of the aircraft movement corridors and flight deck of a carrier being used to store cargo, it's not going to work out.
What a Mech Bay's tonnage represents in-universe is not specified, so the idea that it's wholely taken up by "movement corridors and flight deck" or the equivalent is your assumption, not an express rules statement. For example, a mech bay might represent a cubbyhole-like structure that also holds gantries and other equipment, opening up into a central corridor/larger space where mechs actually move about. Most depictions of BT in media go with something along those lines, so I would say those come as close to a canonical answer as we have right now. In those depictions, even large mechs clearly have space where you could place stuff if you were so inclined, without any risk of obstructing traffic.
And I don't know where you got 1,500 BV from, I'm against using 4 Wasp's, not for it.
Well, you used 4 Wasps as your example of a lower BV cap. A stock wasp is 384 BV, which multiplied by 4 is 1536 BV. You seem to think that's way too low, but even in your exaggerated example, that's a workable BV for a small encounter. And no one's forcing you to go that low. As a hypothetical, 4000 BV is both lower than what most people tend to play, but much higher than your 4 Wasps scenario. That's enough to get two Atlases and change, or perhaps 3 Warhammers, or 10 Wasps plus some pilot upgrades. That's small, but hardly dueling either. And it's getting really irritating to have to point out that no one is trying to force anyone to play low-BV games. Catalyst isn't going to suddenly start mandating tournaments cut down on BV because some random group decided to shake things up by trying out smaller force sizes. They would change tournaments only if people were always playing those smaller games, in which case it's hard to argue it would be a bad business decision.
The whole idea was someone responding to the question "why use lights" with a suggestion to try smaller games where they might be more likely to shine. That someone wasn't even me, I just don't like people tearing down an idea based on really strange premises, that don't seem to have any bearing on the idea at all, but some weird conception of what's "healthy" for the game.
-
Has there been any discussion of Clan tech lights yet? It's only one group, and clan is of course way stronger, but how do light mechs fare there? Because my impression was that you could do quite a bit.
-XL engines are both prevalent and less vulnerable, with a side torso loss being bad, but not an instant kill.
-Compact and efficient weight-saving tech for armor and structure frees up further mass.
-Lightweight, but very powerful weaponry is available, and you get the same 10 free DHS that everyone else gets, allowing you to choose hot-running options.
The only thing working against lights here is the presence of longer-ranged Pulse Lasers and generally better pilots.
I know my forays into Clantech with SSW were pretty fruitful. You can build a 30-tonner 10/15 quad with max armor and 7 tons of weaponry. That's enough for an ERPPC or ER Large Laser, both weapons that really allow you to play the ranges and kite. Couple that with going prone every turn, trying to nab partial cover whenever possible, and you can stay really hard to hit while throwing out hefty punches of your own. It becomes a lot dicier to chase after scouts when they can deal out 15-point hits, or strike from 25 hexes away.
The original FASA designers figured out light Mechs pretty quickly in TRO3050.
Option 1:Insane speed for survival.
Option 2:Heavy Mech fire-power on a light
The elephant in the room are three 40 and 45 ton Clan Mechs. They can comfortably hit the To-Hit modifiers lights used to use to survive while still carrying better guns and armour.
To stand out against that light Mechs need to crack 15 hexes to have a real speed advantage. But it took a while to figure this out as Clan Mechs as a group slowed down through the 3050s and played up fire-power.
Current designs only go the fire-power route as dedicated light Mech hunters. Light light Mechs are rare because you need a minimum of armour to protect against stray hits removing legs etc. All sorts of gadgets are utilised to make the Mechs harder to hit as lights have critical to burn.
But ultimately Clan lights biggest enemy are medium Clan Mechs and light vehicles. One does the job better. The other cheaper. So the Clan Mech has to find a niche where it can thrive.
-
The original FASA designers figured out light Mechs pretty quickly in TRO3050.
Option 1:Insane speed for survival.
Option 2:Heavy Mech fire-power on a light
The elephant in the room are three 40 and 45 ton Clan Mechs. They can comfortably hit the To-Hit modifiers lights used to use to survive while still carrying better guns and armour.
To stand out against that light Mechs need to crack 15 hexes to have a real speed advantage. But it took a while to figure this out as Clan Mechs as a group slowed down through the 3050s and played up fire-power.
Current designs only go the fire-power route as dedicated light Mech hunters. Light light Mechs are rare because you need a minimum of armour to protect against stray hits removing legs etc. All sorts of gadgets are utilised to make the Mechs harder to hit as lights have critical to burn.
But ultimately Clan lights biggest enemy are medium Clan Mechs and light vehicles. One does the job better. The other cheaper. So the Clan Mech has to find a niche where it can thrive.
Yeah, with clantech 50-tonners become the optimal 7/11s, so it's certainly not the best situation for the lights. I'm honestly unsure as to why they decided on such a massive jump in MP required to get from +4 to +5. If they had continued the trend from previous TMMs +5 should only have required 14-16 movement, but instead it's a whopping 18. And then for some reason the MP/TMM curve dips to allow for 25+ movers to get their +6. If a +5 TMM required 16 hexes of movement, that would make the progression 3, 5, 7, 10, 16, 25, which is a way cleaner approximation of an exponential curve.
That's a big benefit to the quad, though. 15 running MP gives it enough to comfortably stand up from prone without a roll, move at least 10 hexes, then drop again. Effectively generates a +5 "TMM" due to the +1 to hit from being prone (against attacks from non-adjacent enemies at least). You even get what amounts to a free facing change since you can choose your facing when you get up (at least that was my impression).
-
What a Mech Bay's tonnage represents in-universe is not specified, so the idea that it's wholely taken up by "movement corridors and flight deck" or the equivalent is your assumption, not an express rules statement. For example, a mech bay might represent a cubbyhole-like structure that also holds gantries and other equipment, opening up into a central corridor/larger space where mechs actually move about. Most depictions of BT in media go with something along those lines, so I would say those come as close to a canonical answer as we have right now. In those depictions, even large mechs clearly have space where you could place stuff if you were so inclined, without any risk of obstructing traffic.
*Headdesk*
"Movement Corridors and flight deck"was for RL carriers, not DS, but as you bring it up, yes 'Mech and ASF Bays do include allow units carried in them, but NOT cargo bays to be launched into and recovered from space.
Well, you used 4 Wasps as your example of a lower BV cap. A stock wasp is 384 BV, which multiplied by 4 is 1536 BV. You seem to think that's way too low, but even in your exaggerated example, that's a workable BV for a small encounter. And no one's forcing you to go that low. As a hypothetical, 4000 BV is both lower than what most people tend to play, but much higher than your 4 Wasps scenario. That's enough to get two Atlases and change, or perhaps 3 Warhammers, or 10 Wasps plus some pilot upgrades. That's small, but hardly dueling either. And it's getting really irritating to have to point out that no one is trying to force anyone to play low-BV games. Catalyst isn't going to suddenly start mandating tournaments cut down on BV because some random group decided to shake things up by trying out smaller force sizes. They would change tournaments only if people were always playing those smaller games, in which case it's hard to argue it would be a bad business decision.
The whole idea was someone responding to the question "why use lights" with a suggestion to try smaller games where they might be more likely to shine. That someone wasn't even me, I just don't like people tearing down an idea based on really strange premises, that don't seem to have any bearing on the idea at all, but some weird conception of what's "healthy" for the game.
I was using 4 Wasps as an example force, for illustrative purposes, and you will note it was one I didn't recommend.
Seriously I worry about you're reading comprhension.
-
*Headdesk*
"Movement Corridors and flight deck"was for RL carriers, not DS, but as you bring it up, yes 'Mech and ASF Bays do include allow units carried in them, but NOT cargo bays to be launched into and recovered from space.
Cargo bays? Launched into and recovered from space? "Bays do include allow units carried in them"? I don't see how that has any bearing whatsoever on what I proposed, which was making use of the spare space in mech bays to carry supplies. I can't see how one can make the argument that a bay with enough space for an Atlas has nowhere to put things when a Wasp is in the bay instead. Mech bays aren't some kind of magical hypothetical space that shrinks to fit the mech exactly yet still weighs the same. Even in BT's wacky physics, a 20-ton mech is significantly smaller than a 100 ton mech. And I will again point to the real-world practice of lashing supplies and equipment to the ceiling and walls to keep it out of the way.
And for that matter, why the hell are practical space constraints even an issue here? If a Mech can fit 120 LRMs in a 1-ton bay, while also being the size of a building, but only weighing as much as a much smaller tank, then you can damn well fit some extra supplies in a mech bay.
I was using 4 Wasps as an example force, for illustrative purposes, and you will note it was one I didn't recommend.
Seriously I worry about you're reading comprhension.
I was well aware of that. What I was pointing out was that the force size you used as an example, an exaggerated one meant to make the idea sound bad, isn't nearly as horrible as you made it out to be. Four bug lights vs an equal BV in bigger mechs? Seems like a fine game to me, and potentially a learning experience where one can really test the mettle of lights. And that's again, the made up example you used to make the idea sound bad. Just because you don't like an idea, doesn't mean people have to deliberately choose the worst possible implementation to fit reality to your opinion. If people can do mech-on-mech duels, and also do 10000 BV slugfests, then they can probably manage something in between without having a bad time.
-
there are 2 different arguments there. One is for the rapid deployment of assets, mechs or otherwise. You cannot carry extra cargo if you want to do that. Be it launching a Wasp or an Atlas. Period. On the other hand, if you have a secure landing area and do not care for unloading time, you should be able to fill your gantry to the brim with stuff and unload it. Offloading rate should be SLOWER than the rules allow, but not impossible or unheard of by any margin.
These are just 2 different uses of available space in a dopship. None invalidates the other or makes it a bad move. It just depends on your circumstances and aims (max cargo and supplies vs immediate combat power).
-
ok, side question:
dropping mechs via orbital drop or atmosphere (GBL? ... mechs deployed from flying DS via jump jets?)
Those mechs must be transported via cubicles (iirc); how many can you deploy at a time? is 2 per door, like ASF?
-
Cargo bays? Launched into and recovered from space? "Bays do include allow units carried in them"? I don't see how that has any bearing whatsoever on what I proposed, which was making use of the spare space in mech bays to carry supplies. I can't see how one can make the argument that a bay with enough space for an Atlas has nowhere to put things when a Wasp is in the bay instead. Mech bays aren't some kind of magical hypothetical space that shrinks to fit the mech exactly yet still weighs the same. Even in BT's wacky physics, a 20-ton mech is significantly smaller than a 100 ton mech. And I will again point to the real-world practice of lashing supplies and equipment to the ceiling and walls to keep it out of the way.
And for that matter, why the hell are practical space constraints even an issue here? If a Mech can fit 120 LRMs in a 1-ton bay, while also being the size of a building, but only weighing as much as a much smaller tank, then you can damn well fit some extra supplies in a mech bay.
OK, Elmoth has already corrected you somewhat here, but I'll make things absolutely clear: The entire point of a 'Mech Bay is to carry a 'Mech in a combat ready state, the 'Mech is transported upright in an gantry allowing easy access, the MechWarrior can quickly climb aboard it when it comes time to disembark, push the start button and walk it off the DS through the halways big enough to accommodate a 'Mech, that's why the Bay is 150 tons. If you don't like this you can always instead transport the 'Mech as cargo, where it is placed lying down onto it's back, dragged on and off the DS, a process that can easily take 15 or more minutes, and once it's outside it must be prepped for use, a process that takes another 15 minutes. And this knowledge is fairly basic and common.
I was well aware of that. What I was pointing out was that the force size you used as an example, an exaggerated one meant to make the idea sound bad, isn't nearly as horrible as you made it out to be. Four bug lights vs an equal BV in bigger mechs? Seems like a fine game to me, and potentially a learning experience where one can really test the mettle of lights. And that's again, the made up example you used to make the idea sound bad. Just because you don't like an idea, doesn't mean people have to deliberately choose the worst possible implementation to fit reality to your opinion. If people can do mech-on-mech duels, and also do 10000 BV slugfests, then they can probably manage something in between without having a bad time.
I wasn't suggesting 4 bugs Vs. a single bigger 'Mech, but 4 Vs. 4 bugs. And even if you did make that the norm it wouldn't work, too limiting in how the games would play out.
ok, side question:
dropping mechs via orbital drop or atmosphere (GBL? ... mechs deployed from flying DS via jump jets?)
Those mechs must be transported via cubicles (iirc); how many can you deploy at a time? is 2 per door, like ASF?
Off the top of my head, would replace ASF on a 1-to-1 ratio, but I've got the odd feeling you shouldn't be using doors exo-atmospheric, something about fusion torch fighters flying down corridors doesn't sound safe.
-
Vehicle cubicles (bays?) come in light & heavy versions. I've never understood why Mech cubicles shouldn't be the same.
-
At a guess, to make existing fluff match newly created construction rules. Eg. a novel saying a Leopard can carry 120 light vehicles.
Aerospace suffers from a lot of the early hardware being described before construction rules existed. The classic example being a Union lacking the spare cargo space to supply its existing combat load, let alone haul off raided resources.
-
Yeah, a union being unable to actually raid is one of the things that always had me scratching my head in the setting. I just assumed they forgot a zero behind the 75
-
I always chalked it up to being caused by FASA's poor-to-nonexistent checking of their work before publishing.
-
Cargo bays? Launched into and recovered from space? "Bays do include allow units carried in them"? I don't see how that has any bearing whatsoever on what I proposed, which was making use of the spare space in mech bays to carry supplies. I can't see how one can make the argument that a bay with enough space for an Atlas has nowhere to put things when a Wasp is in the bay instead. Mech bays aren't some kind of magical hypothetical space that shrinks to fit the mech exactly yet still weighs the same. Even in BT's wacky physics, a 20-ton mech is significantly smaller than a 100 ton mech. And I will again point to the real-world practice of lashing supplies and equipment to the ceiling and walls to keep it out of the way.
And for that matter, why the hell are practical space constraints even an issue here? If a Mech can fit 120 LRMs in a 1-ton bay, while also being the size of a building, but only weighing as much as a much smaller tank, then you can damn well fit some extra supplies in a mech bay.
I was well aware of that. What I was pointing out was that the force size you used as an example, an exaggerated one meant to make the idea sound bad, isn't nearly as horrible as you made it out to be. Four bug lights vs an equal BV in bigger mechs? Seems like a fine game to me, and potentially a learning experience where one can really test the mettle of lights. And that's again, the made up example you used to make the idea sound bad. Just because you don't like an idea, doesn't mean people have to deliberately choose the worst possible implementation to fit reality to your opinion. If people can do mech-on-mech duels, and also do 10000 BV slugfests, then they can probably manage something in between without having a bad time.
You seem like a reasonable and thoughtful person who is willing to consider other people's ideas. I don't know how you ended up on the Internet, but I don't know if you're going to like it here?
When I brought up the "lower BV to encourage lights" idea, I was thinking of jenner, commando, wolfhound, panther, etc., not a lance of fleas and wasps. A small force of those kinds of mechs could have an interesting fight with a similar force of lights or a smaller force of larger mechs. With fewer weapons systems and heat management issues to juggle, it would be definitely be fine, in particular for new players. Endless slugfests with shambling mechs can be pretty tedious.
The cargo discussions in this thread have really drifted into insanity. Abstracting away unnecessary detail is an essential part of a fun game. I don't want to fill out a cargo manifest down to the last crate of coolant. People should just adopt whatever rules create interesting choices and fun games.
-
Actually, I had never considered it, but a Leopard can transport a company of mechs if you take 3 of the bays (1 mech, 2 ASF) and store mechs there in cargo pods. 450 tons of cargo give you space to store significant amounts of mechs and other equipment stored as cargo, as well as some infantry bays to put those pilots and techies in. And you still have 3 bays for a combat drop to secure the landing area. If you need more than that to secure the landing area... well, it is not a very safe place to land in in the first place.
Deploying from cargo pods is rather easy and doesn't take much time. You can land 10 hours from your target and have plenty of time to unload your mechs before you encounter any serious opposition. And 450 tons of mechs + 3 ready mechs can be a full medium company you are deploying, not a raiding lance. There are enough planets described in the fluff that would make this a smart move, in fact.
If you go to the limit and turn a Leopard into a transport ship you can have 5 bays (750 tons) for mechs and one bay (150 tons) converted to handle the extra personnel (techs and pilots). Cramped, but transports a medium-heavy company easily enough. Not suitable for combat ops, but if you have enough time it can be useful none the less without investing in the much more expensive Union.
Xavi
-
You seem like a reasonable and thoughtful person who is willing to consider other people's ideas. I don't know how you ended up on the Internet, but I don't know if you're going to like it here?
When I brought up the "lower BV to encourage lights" idea, I was thinking of jenner, commando, wolfhound, panther, etc., not a lance of fleas and wasps. A small force of those kinds of mechs could have an interesting fight with a similar force of lights or a smaller force of larger mechs. With fewer weapons systems and heat management issues to juggle, it would be definitely be fine, in particular for new players. Endless slugfests with shambling mechs can be pretty tedious.
The cargo discussions in this thread have really drifted into insanity. Abstracting away unnecessary detail is an essential part of a fun game. I don't want to fill out a cargo manifest down to the last crate of coolant. People should just adopt whatever rules create interesting choices and fun games.
The internet? Damn, I thought I was out of there. Yeah that was my impression of your idea as well. A lance of heavier lights or lighter mediums as the basis. Something like 4000-5000 BV, perhaps.
Actually, I had never considered it, but a Leopard can transport a company of mechs if you take 3 of the bays (1 mech, 2 ASF) and store mechs there in cargo pods. 450 tons of cargo give you space to store significant amounts of mechs and other equipment stored as cargo, as well as some infantry bays to put those pilots and techies in. And you still have 3 bays for a combat drop to secure the landing area. If you need more than that to secure the landing area... well, it is not a very safe place to land in in the first place.
Deploying from cargo pods is rather easy and doesn't take much time. You can land 10 hours from your target and have plenty of time to unload your mechs before you encounter any serious opposition. And 450 tons of mechs + 3 ready mechs can be a full medium company you are deploying, not a raiding lance. There are enough planets described in the fluff that would make this a smart move, in fact.
If you go to the limit and turn a Leopard into a transport ship you can have 5 bays (750 tons) for mechs and one bay (150 tons) converted to handle the extra personnel (techs and pilots). Cramped, but transports a medium-heavy company easily enough. Not suitable for combat ops, but if you have enough time it can be useful none the less without investing in the much more expensive Union.
Xavi
Seems like a viable tactic to me. Sacrifice aerospace capability and a little bit of immediate strength to transport a far larger force. Deploy your heavy hitters to secure the landing zone, then unpack the rest. And in such a setup, there's definitely value to lights, since you can carry so many more of them.
-
OK, Elmoth has already corrected you somewhat here, but I'll make things absolutely clear: The entire point of a 'Mech Bay is to carry a 'Mech in a combat ready state, the 'Mech is transported upright in an gantry allowing easy access, the MechWarrior can quickly climb aboard it when it comes time to disembark, push the start button and walk it off the DS through the halways big enough to accommodate a 'Mech, that's why the Bay is 150 tons. If you don't like this you can always instead transport the 'Mech as cargo, where it is placed lying down onto it's back, dragged on and off the DS, a process that can easily take 15 or more minutes, and once it's outside it must be prepped for use, a process that takes another 15 minutes. And this knowledge is fairly basic and common.
This knowledge should also be fairly common, tonnage does not equal volume-
This is one of those areas where FASAhysics runs into problems- the volume of the typical DS makes the insides so wide open the crew can spend their days swinging cats without out worrying about harming the cats. Which means no reason exists to make each mechbay cubicle with its gantries into a mech shaped coffin.
Throw on top of that each mech cubicle would have to cover the volume of the biggest mech in each direction (height/ width/depth) means they cannot make such a cubicle 'small' . . . it has to fit the depth of a quad (twice the depth of a bipedal mech?), height of the tallest design, and the width of something like a Stone Rhino.
Now you might not be able to make them interchangeable when you are acting like a WWII sub going on patrol- IE walking on cases of canned food and eating your way into the showers- since the 'spare' volume of a Commando is going to be different than a Devastator or Goliath.
Check the math, I think Cray once compared a Dropship to a beachball for density. The engines are rated to lift the weight (tonnage) at the specified thrust. You have a LOT of extra volume in the cradle itself. The art (which is what DS cutaways are) and fiction offer a couple of different ideas/methods for orbital & atmo mech drops. Per the fluff, a mech cubicle can take a quad, the tallest/shortest mech, and the widest mech with out any changes to the dimensions of the cubicle which means there will be open volume (corners, edges, ceiling) where items can be stowed that will not interfere with the operation of the mech that is placed in the cubicle.
You want to use aircraft carriers as an example . . . sure!
2018
https://news.usni.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/4768872.jpg (https://news.usni.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/4768872.jpg)
(cannot remember how to shrink that)
Netted cargo sitting under the radome and behind the propeller right next to a E-2C. Cargo next to a Hornet, drop tank sitting behind one on a pallet, and in the upper left you see more drop tanks stored in racks hanging from the ceiling.
post-9/11 getting read for a sortie
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/US_Navy_030320-N-0295M-001_Dozens_of_bombs_line_the_hangar_bay_aboard_USS_Constellation_(CV_64)_ready_for_use_in_support_of_Operation_Iraqi_Freedom.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/US_Navy_030320-N-0295M-001_Dozens_of_bombs_line_the_hangar_bay_aboard_USS_Constellation_(CV_64)_ready_for_use_in_support_of_Operation_Iraqi_Freedom.jpg)
You can see all the bombs ready to be loaded as jets go to the launch deck.
1964 Enterprise
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/USS_Enterprise_%28CVN-65%29%2C_hangar_view_1964.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/USS_Enterprise_%28CVN-65%29%2C_hangar_view_1964.jpg)
Holy crap, I cannot find a small picture to save my life . . . You can see the bombs here, again resting on dollies under the wings of IIRC the F-14 precursor. Probably drop tanks strapped to the bulkheads again.
50s/60s look
(http://images.yuku.com/image/jpeg/19c255d9d4d2c6739c6581cffff0339ede473f8.jpg)
Finally one that is properly sized- you can see the tanks on the bulkhead again with parts again under the wings.
Amphib carrier?
(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/the-hanger-deck-of-hms-invincible-as-the-aircraft-carrier-joins-nato-picture-id830163394?s=594x594)
You can see all sorts of cargo strapped to the bulkheads, and if you look up at the ceiling you will see a whole row of cargo strapped to the bulkhead on a little platform around the hanger. And once again, drop tanks hanging from the ceiling.
More recent vintage
(https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.5TWNUDjexCsaoOCzvaEe5QHaE8?pid=Api&rs=1)
Again, sized right! You can see exercise machines next to a Hornet with a engine out, stuff under the wings, and one guy is even doing sit ups where the hanger deck's fire doors are located!
And just to go to the beginning- the 1920s
(https://padresteve.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/020122.jpg)
Storage lockers on the hanger deck, life boats stored between the structural members, and you can see cargo crates further down the deck.
And its not just the US- here is a French carrier shot-
(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/this-photo-shows-marine-rafale-fighter-jets-being-maintained-in-a-picture-id611578208?s=594x594)
-
If you want the ultimate in carrier-based storage solutions, I think ones like these take the cake.
https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/usn-carrier-hangar-deck-stowage.39414/#lg=attachment249588&slide=0 (https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/usn-carrier-hangar-deck-stowage.39414/#lg=attachment249588&slide=0)
Those are planes hanging from the ceiling. Wings are removed, but I think it goes to show just how much really is done to make use of space when it's at a premium.
-
I wonder if those locations are classified as cargo volume, since the material up there does not get in the way of work on the aircraft themselves. The helicopter picture with the cranes on the ceiling is an example, as there are only the lights and cranes on the ceiling, no cargo.
The Battletech equivalent would be a Mech bay that is 2 levels tall, and on the 3rd level is cargo. If the Mech cubicle is reconfigured to handle a Quad Mech, that means all of the equipment is moved around. This could include false floors/walls to move a cargo bay around the Mech Bay itself.
To me storing cargo next to the aircraft would be the equivalent of putting cargo in a Mech Bay directly.
But to do all of this, we will need rules to allow use of the spare tonnage
-
I wonder if those locations are classified as cargo volume, since the material up there does not get in the way of work on the aircraft themselves. The helicopter picture with the cranes on the ceiling is an example, as there are only the lights and cranes on the ceiling, no cargo.
The Battletech equivalent would be a Mech bay that is 2 levels tall, and on the 3rd level is cargo. If the Mech cubicle is reconfigured to handle a Quad Mech, that means all of the equipment is moved around. This could include false floors/walls to move a cargo bay around the Mech Bay itself.
To me storing cargo next to the aircraft would be the equivalent of putting cargo in a Mech Bay directly.
But to do all of this, we will need rules to allow use of the spare tonnage
Well, a simple implementation would only require setting a fraction of the non-mech tonnage aside for necessary equipment, then allowing you to use the remaining fraction for.
So, for example, let's say that a 100-tonner will just barely fit in the bay in terms of weight. That would imply that 50 tons of the bay is stuff like gantries, walls, basic maintenance equipment, corridors for movement, etc. Since we want to keep things simple and a mech bay canonically can fit any mech without significant modification, let's say that this stuff always weighs the same regardless of mech weight. Tada, the cargo you can stuff into a mech bay is equal to 100 minus mech tonnage. If you want to reflect the lesser efficiency of stuffing things into every nook and cranny and keeping it as much out of the way as possible, then you can just halve the value, in which case a 95 ton mech would leave 2.5 tons, and a 20 ton mech would leave 40.
-
Off the top of my head, would replace ASF on a 1-to-1 ratio, but I've got the odd feeling you shouldn't be using doors exo-atmospheric, something about fusion torch fighters flying down corridors doesn't sound safe.
Asking about the egg shaped drop pods for mechs, that's a thing right?
-
Asking about the egg shaped drop pods for mechs, that's a thing right?
Drop cocoons are indeed a thing, and probably take up a ridiculous percentage of that available space in a 'Mech cubicle, if those are being carried.
With a Leopard DS, it would seem like a good idea to haul the 3 heaviest 'Mechs of a lance in combat-ready condition in their respective cubicles, while the lance's last cubicle holds (5) 20T bug-'Mechs as cargo, to be reactivated upon arrival. You start with 3 decent units to secure the LZ, and a couple of hours later you've got two full recon/raiding lances in action. Making a hasty exit with looted stuff, you have the various bug-'Mechs wait at the bottom of the ramp with cargo strapped to them, and as soon as the bigger, slower units are up the ramp and heading for their respective gantries, the Lights drag themselves and cargo in and pile into whatever heap fits, to be quickly tied down by the crew. They can be sorted out and properly stored later, after reaching orbit, with the help of a bigger 'Mech with hands and whatever cranes and hoists the DS has installed.
-
Just wanted to add that I am cool with mech/ASF bays as is. Going any deeper would/could lead to a much deeper rabbit hole. Some clarifications would be nice, but any optional rules would lead back to the rabbit hole.
I do feel the pain of bay size, I mean if I have a 15t ASF and the bay is 150t, I'd feel a bit jaded.
-
Bring 10 of the buggers as cargo. or a few less and inves tin bays for the pilots and techs ;)
Xavi
-
After this page i have a mental image of a leopard drop ship with swarms of bug mechs running out. Kinda like the circus gag with all the clowns in the VW bug. key up "benny hill" music right about now...
-
Now I am having another more sinister image of a militia I Tel mb being abused by his superior saying "but sir! There were only 3 mechs securing the starport for the leopard! How could I know there were 9 more inside!?"
-
Bring 10 of the buggers as cargo. or a few less and inves tin bays for the pilots and techs ;)
Xavi
I have made a few DS and as I'm working out the cargo I try to allot amounts to weapons/parts/ammo/replacements/etc. Made an Imperial DS that had 12 ASF bays, allocated at least 96t (8x12) in TIE Fighter replacements. (always figure out the amount of food/resources crew/pass. use up too -- I shoot for a full fuel usage at 1g, strategic fuel use, right?)
Also included steerage for replacement pilots -- they would get to upgrade when the others died off. And yes, quarters of some sort for techs!
-
I keep having mental images of Leopards plummeting in flames because you all keep prioritising Mechs over ASF.
-
Us and the fiction and TRO writers
-
I keep having mental images of Leopards plummeting in flames because you all keep prioritising Mechs over ASF.
If we were being realistic, this wouldn’t be battletech, and the amount of air support a Leopard provides wouldn’t be nearly enough. Personally, I would prefer at least a flight of ASFs(4) per dropship, double what a leopard typically carries.
-
Yes, BT lacks a "double leopard" ship of 2 Lances until the 3060.
-
Us and the fiction and TRO writers
Well, The Price of Glory gives a good example of what the ASF are for back in 1987. In this case temporary local air control to get a DropShip through orbit and re-entry.
By keeping two ASF bays rather than two Mech bays you increase your chances of getting your DropShip onworld where you can unload your cargo of light Mechs to your heart's content.
-
How are most light mechs on ammo consumption? dropping lights into areas for recon and guerilla warfare sounds a bit more advantageous than trying to parachute out a couple of hovercraft.
-
That really depends on the mech. A Wolfhound needs no ammo. A Jenner is only slightly dangerous without ammo as it is with ammo. A Javelin or Valkyrie without ammo is little threat.
-
There's also mechs like the Wasp and Stinger, which on one hand, are fairly dependent on ammo-based weapons (about 1/3 of their max offensive output, which is hardly impressive). But on the other, they have enough ammo that they will almost certainly be destroyed before they've been through enough fighting to use it all (Wasp gets 50 salvos for its SRM-2, Stinger gets 100 salvos for its machine guns).
If I had to chose a very light mech for rear-area raiding, I'd probably look into one of the energy-boat Locust variants.
-
With the Javelin & Jenner I would really expect them to charge in and fire when they should (ie back shot, numerical superiority).
I would think Wasps/Stingers (which ever does not have the MG) would fire once, then run and hide. -- gotta support the hours long battles! -- hard to do with aluminum foil armor.
-
With the Javelin & Jenner I would really expect them to charge in and fire when they should (ie back shot, numerical superiority).
I would think Wasps/Stingers (which ever does not have the MG) would fire once, then run and hide. -- gotta support the hours long battles! -- hard to do with aluminum foil armor.
The Jenner also really wants to hit-and-run if it can. It has the speed/jump jets for it, a strong alpha that generates substantial heat, and unimpressive armor for its weight. Run into an arc that allows for minimal return fire, alpha, then run/jump away to cool off and avoid the inevitable return salvoes next turn.
-
I would say the next available chance ...
From some of the books I would think that the Jenner might dart in, fire, hit?, then run away until tomorrow. The MAD (for example) that it hit would be down several points of armor unless it had access to a repair base.
A couple of months of this is how it seems some 'invasions' go.
-
I would say the next available chance ...
From some of the books I would think that the Jenner might dart in, fire, hit?, then run away until tomorrow. The MAD (for example) that it hit would be down several points of armor unless it had access to a repair base.
A couple of months of this is how it seems some 'invasions' go.
More or less. Probes, rear area raiding, “commando” esque missions, that’s generally the realm of your lighter assets. Fast and fairly expendable. Every supply convoy you smash, every force concentration you sniff out, every night of sleep you disrupt, will degrade the opposition’s ability to fight. As to why you would use light mechs for this rather than combat vehicles, there could be a few reasons, some of which are borne out in game mechanics and others are theoretical.
-While hovers and VTOLs are faster, hovers have worse operational mobility and VTOLs lack subtlety. In say, a mountain range, there are more places to hide from air assets and very few places where hovers can go.
-Light mechs are usually able to take more punishment while continuing to move. Hovercraft in particular are hideously vulnerable to motive crits. And in these operations, where the cavalry is just over the horizon, an asset that can’t escape is an asset you lost.
-This one is pure conjecture. A major limit on independent operations is logistics. A modern army breathes fuel and shits out broken track links and flat tires. Fusion vehicles of all stripes mostly eliminate the need for the former. But for the latter? Those hovercraft skirts don’t last forever. Rough terrain will chew them up. Suspensions will lose pressure, treads will wear. But legs? Those might be different. Myomer, if it works as advertised, is a technician’s wet dream. It’s propulsion and suspension in one. A single “component” that does all the work of putting metal in motion. Your hydraulics, your servos, your motors, your transmission. All of that can be replaced with myomer and electrical wiring.
-
+1 to everything you just said. And if your target has lots of veh's that can challenge you, then get back to extraction and report!
I think enough of us are so used to MW2 and other games; getting in and blowing everything up. Lights will get caught up in that type of combat eventually. But, as everyone has pointed out ... they can die awfully quick.
-
+1 to everything you just said. And if your target has lots of veh's that can challenge you, then get back to extraction and report!
I think enough of us are so used to MW2 and other games; getting in and blowing everything up. Lights will get caught up in that type of combat eventually. But, as everyone has pointed out ... they can die awfully quick.
I mean, even by BV you can usually get 2-4 lights for a heavy or assault. If you go by weight (assuming you carry the lights as cargo), it can be as much as 5:1 in terms of carry capacity. 1 Locust is surprisingly durable. 5 Locusts can take a lot of punishment in total, especially since they're less vulnerable to lucky shots as a whole.
As big a fan I am of 40 ton 7/11 movers, I gotta say Ravannion's hordes are growing on me.
-
There's so much wrong here, but skipping over the D&D stuff to the BT stuff. A damage system like you describe is more likely to immobilize a 'Mech then it then it is a vehicle, at least one it comes to Bug 'Mechs, which is what would be used, and if it's a vehicle fixing means the crew takes an hour to change some tyres or something, if it's the 'Mech, well you're calling for a recovery vehicle.
The point of the D&D reference is to draw a connection between an infantry squad or platoon, and a randomly rolled group of orcs. The idea is that in D&D, there are enough things out there wandering around that you might encounter a group of monsters that just happened to be in the area. In Battletech, you wouldn't encounter orcs, but you might encounter a random rifle platoon. This wouldn't happen in a conventional game between two players, but might in a Mechwarrior campaign with a GM helping to craft the story. Since this is a tabletop game message board, I figured the posters here would be familiar with the concept. You could very easily encounter a small group of enemies without them being the focus of an evening's play session. "On the way to the battle, you get shot at by some jerks with an SRM launcher..."
Battlemechs have a 1 in 36 chance of getting a through-armor-critical on the hit location chart (a 2.7% chance). From the front and rear, vehicles have a 2 in 36 chance (rolls of 2 and 12, or a 5.4% chance). From the side, vehicles have a 7 in 36 chance (locations 2, 8, and 12), for a 19.44% chance. That's not motive hits, that's critical hits. And the vehicle critical hit chart is a lot more damaging than the Battlemech critical chart. Even under Total Warfare rules, vehicles are a lot more vulnerable to damage.
A platoon of rifle infantry would have to get extremely lucky to down a Battlemech in one salvo, even if it's a bug mech. Yeah, specialized infantry units exist, sure. But the kind of low-tech insurgents that you might see on any battlefield in the galaxy probably won't be ultra specialized. Regular rifle infantry is probably a generous representation for them. These are the kinds of forces that any third world planet could sort of spontaneously generate.
For the most part, bug mechs are just heavily armored enough to eat a round of fire from an infantry platoon without suffering serious damage. Yeah, you might roll snake-eyes, get a center torso possible crit, and then blow up the engine or destroy the gyro. But you probably won't. Over the course of a long campaign, I think a bug mech that receives regular repairs will outlast a vehicle of the same weight.
Keep in mind that motive hits are really easy to get on vehicles. If you shoot a vehicle from the side, a roll of 2, 8, or 12 on the location chart is a possible critical hit. A roll of 3, 4, 5, or 9 is a motive hit. So only hit location rolls of 6, 7, 10, and 11 don't carry the chance of seriously screwing over your vehicle. For a hovercraft (frequently suggested as replacements for mechs), a motive hit from the side needs only a 7+ to completely immobilize the vehicle. It's +2 on the roll because you hit from the side, and +3 because it's a hovercraft. By my back-of-the-napkin math, one out of every roughly 5 hits to the side of a hovercraft (regardless of how much damage they do) should completely immobilize it purely with motive hits. It's actually worse than that, because motive hits add up fast. One in three hits will generate a motive hit, and then it only takes a roll of 3+ on 2D6 to lose movement points (on a 3 or 4, you lose 1 movement point; on a 5 or 6, you're at 1/2 movement; on a 7+ you're immobilized -- and you roll this for each hit).
A vehicle that can be quickly repaired in the field might actually be a liability to your side. If all I have to do is swap out some tires, or repair a broken track, then it's easy for me (as an insurgent enemy) to take your vehicle from you. Now I have a tank.
-
If a random, unsupported rifle platoon tries tackling a mech by itself, the worst possible damage to the mech is usually going to be the risk of getting organic matter lodged in its foot actuators. Unlike D&D, in Battletech there are no bands of rifle infantry randomly roving the countryside, blindly launching suicidal attacks against any mech they come across when they have no support or any real hope of actually harming the thing.
-
If a random, unsupported rifle platoon tries tackling a mech by itself, the worst possible damage to the mech is usually going to be the risk of getting organic matter lodged in its foot actuators. Unlike D&D, in Battletech there are no bands of rifle infantry randomly roving the countryside, blindly launching suicidal attacks against any mech they come across when they have no support or any real hope of actually harming the thing.
Against a wandering savannah master they have pretty good odds though, funny enough. Best case the hover can take out one man per turn, while the PBI can dish out pretty notable damage (don’t infantry deal damage in 2-point clusters? That’s pretty good motive hit and crit seeking). Even against a swarm of hovers, 28 guys can probably survive at least long enough to call in a response force, or better yet, artillery.
The equivalent to “wandering monsters” in a battletech context would be more like picket forces and opposing recon elements. Infantry platoons are nice to dot the landscape with to ensure you have something of a cohesive line. They do well at slowing down and blunting assaults long enough to mobilize a response force, or throw out blankets of FASCAM and hate.
-
The issue with a wandering Savannah Master is actually hitting it. A SM wouldn't stick around to fight, and even at cruising speed it's not an easy target.
There are already rules for units starting with preexisting damage as a result of ongoing conflict. If they're not in a running battle with no time to rotate out for repairs, there's no reason for them to have damage- the idea that there are just tons of random infantry platoons floating around ambushing every hostile force that sets foot onto a world simply isn't born out in-universe.
-
The issue with a wandering Savannah Master is actually hitting it. A SM wouldn't stick around to fight, and even at cruising speed it's not an easy target.
There are already rules for units starting with preexisting damage as a result of ongoing conflict. If they're not in a running battle with no time to rotate out for repairs, there's no reason for them to have damage- the idea that there are just tons of random infantry platoons floating around ambushing every hostile force that sets foot onto a world simply isn't born out in-universe.
The problem is that if the SM just leaves the infantry alone, those infantry can continue reporting its movements and position, especially if the PBI have chosen a good vantage point with long sightlines like any smart person would. VTOLs, artillery, or opposing hovers will then be vectored in to intercept. VTOLs especially will stomp all over SMs, being capable of higher speeds/TMMs and generally carrying equivalent or greater firepower, and their lesser endurance is irrelevant for the intercept role.
By contrast, if you kill the PBI quickly, they may be able to report in the contact, but by the time anyone arrives you can be gone.
There's another respect where hovers have a disadvantage. If hovercraft are anything like the real deal (which they are explicitly supposed to be), they will be quite loud and throw up lots of dust when there's dust to be had. They also tend to be very big for their weight compared to wheeled or tracked vehicles. That means people will see and hear them coming well before they actually arrive, and they can be incredibly easy to track.
-
Savannah Masters are scouts and harrasser units. They are not designd to kill infantry. In fact, the only hover vehicle less-designed to kill infantry is the Regulator. And frankly, I don't even know why hovercraft are even being discussed since the topic of the thread is light mechs. A Savannah Master's response to an infantry ambush should not be trying to shoot it out with them, it should be to disengage (which unless they do something to block its movements somehow it should accomplish automatically) and report the infantry's position to allied forces so they can avoid it or send something to squash it.
-
Savannah Masters are scouts and harrasser units. They are not designd to kill infantry. In fact, the only hover vehicle less-designed to kill infantry is the Regulator. And frankly, I don't even know why hovercraft are even being discussed since the topic of the thread is light mechs. A Savannah Master's response to an infantry ambush should not be trying to shoot it out with them, it should be to disengage (which unless they do something to block its movements somehow it should accomplish automatically) and report the infantry's position to allied forces so they can avoid it or send something to squash it.
I bring it up because hovercraft are one of the primary competitors to light mechs on the ground. The thread is about the advantages of lights. So I'm comparing the two, offering potential advantages of one over the other.
I was also discussing it specifically in the context of rear-area raiding, stuff behind enemy lines. So "disengage and report in" isn't really viable in that scenario. You need to have enough firepower to push through rear-area defenses like PBI in order to get at the really soft targets. If you just leave them alone the enemy is getting a constant play-by-play of where you're going, such that by the time you get there they're going to be ready. Plus, killing random PBI is in itself a useful goal of raiding. You hurt morale, lead the enemy on wild goose chases, and poke out the enemy's eyes.
There are also roles like recon-in-force, where you're trying to provoke a reaction from the enemy, to feel out their numbers and concentration, while keeping them off-balance and potentially sniffing out weak spots that can be exploited. In those scenarios, running away without ever making contact with the enemy also means not doing your job.
-
(wished alt MGs were retconned to be available in most eras, ... and make HMG able to shoot up to 3 hexes, give reg a 4 hex range if needed --- all a different topic)
LMG or P SL for anti infantry work. Need the range for light mechs, gah wait ...P SL is only 3 hexes (clan gets 6). Make that an XP SL.
-
I bring it up because hovercraft are one of the primary competitors to light mechs on the ground. The thread is about the advantages of lights. So I'm comparing the two, offering potential advantages of one over the other.
I was also discussing it specifically in the context of rear-area raiding, stuff behind enemy lines. So "disengage and report in" isn't really viable in that scenario. You need to have enough firepower to push through rear-area defenses like PBI in order to get at the really soft targets. If you just leave them alone the enemy is getting a constant play-by-play of where you're going, such that by the time you get there they're going to be ready. Plus, killing random PBI is in itself a useful goal of raiding. You hurt morale, lead the enemy on wild goose chases, and poke out the enemy's eyes.
There are also roles like recon-in-force, where you're trying to provoke a reaction from the enemy, to feel out their numbers and concentration, while keeping them off-balance and potentially sniffing out weak spots that can be exploited. In those scenarios, running away without ever making contact with the enemy also means not doing your job.
Except that the discussion was about using light mechs as recon and you randomly brought up a Savannah Master fighting infantry.
-
Except that the discussion was about using light mechs as recon and you randomly brought up a Savannah Master fighting infantry.
No? Massey talked about "wandering monsters", using infantry as an example. Then, you argued that random infantry going up against a mech was suicide. Then I pointed out that random infantry can go up against Savannah Masters, and many other recon hovers, which is a point in favor of light mechs. An advantage of light mechs.
-
The issue with a wandering Savannah Master is actually hitting it. A SM wouldn't stick around to fight, and even at cruising speed it's not an easy target.
There are already rules for units starting with preexisting damage as a result of ongoing conflict. If they're not in a running battle with no time to rotate out for repairs, there's no reason for them to have damage- the idea that there are just tons of random infantry platoons floating around ambushing every hostile force that sets foot onto a world simply isn't born out in-universe.
I'm going to be careful not to cross over into Rule 4 territory here (no real world politics stuff), but that's pretty much what the entire Iraq/Afghanistan war was. And we've seen plenty of references in Battletech to garrison duty units having to hunt down insurgents and partisans. So I think that's definitely something that exists in Battletech.
You yourself state that there are rules for starting with pre-existing damage. Now if you were to actually look at how that damage was applied, you wouldn't just be starting by saying "oh my unit has X points of armor damage". There would actually be some scenario where that damage was taken. A group of infantry could attack from ambush, or a jet fighter could launch a salvo of SRMs at you and then fly off, or maybe you were involved in a small skirmish yesterday and haven't had time to make repairs. The point is, attacks like that are very unlikely to immobilize a mech. It's hard to disable a Battlemech without blowing limbs off of it. But low intensity attacks like that have a very good chance of immobilizing a vehicle. Over the course of months of combat, this will take a heavy toll on vehicle forces.
The "wandering monster" is just an illustration of the types of small, low intensity battles that can and do take place in Battletech.
-
You yourself state that there are rules for starting with pre-existing damage.
Yes, in instances where there's been a running battle, not clashes with random infantry platoons that just show up around the area with no support. The Battletech universe is a place where civilian populations are weirdly complacent and don't make a habit of engaging in long-term partisan activities against occupying forces. A scenario where a force was being repeatedly subjected to hit and run attacks in a campaign would usually be played out as being a case where you fight each individual battle and keep existing damage and ammo expenditure between fights.
-
Yes, in instances where there's been a running battle, not clashes with random infantry platoons that just show up around the area with no support. The Battletech universe is a place where civilian populations are weirdly complacent and don't make a habit of engaging in long-term partisan activities against occupying forces. A scenario where a force was being repeatedly subjected to hit and run attacks in a campaign would usually be played out as being a case where you fight each individual battle and keep existing damage and ammo expenditure between fights.
For me personally (not going to speak for Massey), what I was envisioning was along the lines of a lance or company of light elements that have breached the front and are scouting/raiding the enemy's rear areas. They're attacking targets of opportunity while evading/reporting in larger concentrations of force. In such a scenario, the mechs will be taking damage from things like picket forces, convoy guards, supply depot garrisons, VTOLs sent to hunt for them, etc. So less "wandering monsters" and more normal attrition. You hurt them, but they get chances to hurt you.
So to me, attrition would be things like:
-You broke through a weak point in the enemy line: but there were still light forces you had to fight. You kill/ignore them, but they ding you with a few SRMs.
-You come across a picket platoon set up on a nearby ridge, such that they have visibility for many kilometers. They start calling in artillery and reinforcements on you, and would continue to do so if you just ran away, so you wipe them out and bounce before the cavalry arrives. Of course, they disagree strenuously with your decision, and you take a good deal of small arms fire before you can prevail, and one of you gets caught on the edge of a Thumper blast.
-You come across a supply convoy, and start shooting up their trucks. They have some light armor and a mechanized platoon as escort, which you need to fight and destroy to get to the trucks.
-Finding a downed mech, you ambush the salvage crew left behind to recover it. Unfortunately, they managed to get the mech operational enough to fire off a few shots at you.
In all of those situations, you're likely to take at least a little damage, and it's in your best interest to vacate the area as soon as possible. If a unit is immobilized, it's as good as dead, because reinforcements are coming, almost certainly with enough firepower to take out your whole force. Whether someone choses to actually fight out those battles is irrelevant, they still occur within the fiction, and thus should be taken into account when discussing doctrine. In that respect, light mechs seem to beat out other options.
-
The point of the D&D reference is to draw a connection between an infantry squad or platoon, and a randomly rolled group of orcs. The idea is that in D&D, there are enough things out there wandering around that you might encounter a group of monsters that just happened to be in the area. In Battletech, you wouldn't encounter orcs, but you might encounter a random rifle platoon. This wouldn't happen in a conventional game between two players, but might in a Mechwarrior campaign with a GM helping to craft the story. Since this is a tabletop game message board, I figured the posters here would be familiar with the concept. You could very easily encounter a small group of enemies without them being the focus of an evening's play session. "On the way to the battle, you get shot at by some jerks with an SRM launcher..."
Battlemechs have a 1 in 36 chance of getting a through-armor-critical on the hit location chart (a 2.7% chance). From the front and rear, vehicles have a 2 in 36 chance (rolls of 2 and 12, or a 5.4% chance). From the side, vehicles have a 7 in 36 chance (locations 2, 8, and 12), for a 19.44% chance. That's not motive hits, that's critical hits. And the vehicle critical hit chart is a lot more damaging than the Battlemech critical chart. Even under Total Warfare rules, vehicles are a lot more vulnerable to damage.
And you (I think it was you) said "Two five-point hits to the legs", when hitting the legs it's 50/50 which leg gets hit, so 1-in-4 that they hit the same leg, at which point a Bug 'Mech needs a new leg. And in this situation vehicle crits are a LOT more forgiving then 'Mech ones, because many of them will go away by the time the fight you're traveling to starts
A vehicle that can be quickly repaired in the field might actually be a liability to your side. If all I have to do is swap out some tires, or repair a broken track, then it's easy for me (as an insurgent enemy) to take your vehicle from you. Now I have a tank.
Yes, because a tank that is getting a tire change but otherwise functional is so defenseless.
I'm going to be careful not to cross over into Rule 4 territory here (no real world politics stuff), but that's pretty much what the entire Iraq/Afghanistan war was. And we've seen plenty of references in Battletech to garrison duty units having to hunt down insurgents and partisans. So I think that's definitely something that exists in Battletech.
You yourself state that there are rules for starting with pre-existing damage. Now if you were to actually look at how that damage was applied, you wouldn't just be starting by saying "oh my unit has X points of armor damage". There would actually be some scenario where that damage was taken. A group of infantry could attack from ambush, or a jet fighter could launch a salvo of SRMs at you and then fly off, or maybe you were involved in a small skirmish yesterday and haven't had time to make repairs. The point is, attacks like that are very unlikely to immobilize a mech. It's hard to disable a Battlemech without blowing limbs off of it. But low intensity attacks like that have a very good chance of immobilizing a vehicle. Over the course of months of combat, this will take a heavy toll on vehicle forces.
The "wandering monster" is just an illustration of the types of small, low intensity battles that can and do take place in Battletech.
And this just shows why using 'Mechs here is a bad idea, you need infantry in this situation.
-
And you (I think it was you) said "Two five-point hits to the legs", when hitting the legs it's 50/50 which leg gets hit, so 1-in-4 that they hit the same leg, at which point a Bug 'Mech needs a new leg. And in this situation vehicle crits are a LOT more forgiving then 'Mech ones, because many of them will go away by the time the fight you're traveling to startsYes, because a tank that is getting a tire change but otherwise functional is so defenseless.
And this just shows why using 'Mechs here is a bad idea, you need infantry in this situation.
For 2 5-point hits, that doesn't necessarily mean being down a leg. Even 20-tonners can have 4 IS and 8 armor (the Locust is a prime example). It'll go internal, potentially score some nasty crits, but far from a guarantee. That's not even getting into anything heavier, which can definitely mount at least 10 points of leg armor.
What do you mean by "go away"? Crits don't fix themselves to my knowledge. And repair work isn't exactly something you can conduct on the move. Sure, sometimes a motive crit just means a flat tire, but it can just as easily be a cracked axle, or a melted suspension. Those are not field repairs. At best you'll need an hour and spare parts that aren't typically carried, at worst the whole vehicle is a write-off.
According to Strategic Operations rules, Motive Systems can't be replaced, only repaired (which takes an hour). So if your repair roll fails, the vehicle is done until you can get a better tech. If no better tech is available, the vehicle is just broken.
In any situation where a vehicle is immobilized and the enemy has taken the field, immobilized vehicles are basically lost. The enemy can deal with them at their leisure by using long-ranged weapons, artillery, etc. And that's assuming the tank crew is suicidal and won't bail out or surrender. So if you retreated or withdrew, say goodbye to anything that can't run away. Heck, even if you have control of the battlefield after a fight? As long as the enemy is in artillery range you can sure bet they'll take some parthian shots at your immobilized units.
While some of these situations are definitely better-served with other units, some are things that will happen to you regardless of whether you're on the front-lines or machine-gunning civilians pacifying the population. Things like strafing runs from flyers and artillery are, if anything, more likely to hit you right before you have to fight.
-
For 2 5-point hits, that doesn't necessarily mean being down a leg. Even 20-tonners can have 4 IS and 8 armor (the Locust is a prime example). It'll go internal, potentially score some nasty crits, but far from a guarantee. That's not even getting into anything heavier, which can definitely mount at least 10 points of leg armor.
My mistake, I don't know hoe I skipped over the Locust when I was checking out the numbers
What do you mean by "go away"? Crits don't fix themselves to my knowledge. And repair work isn't exactly something you can conduct on the move. Sure, sometimes a motive crit just means a flat tire, but it can just as easily be a cracked axle, or a melted suspension. Those are not field repairs. At best you'll need an hour and spare parts that aren't typically carried, at worst the whole vehicle is a write-off. According to Strategic Operations rules, Motive Systems can't be replaced, only repaired (which takes an hour). So if your repair roll fails, the vehicle is done until you can get a better tech. If no better tech is available, the vehicle is just broken.
Crew Stunned goes, and I'd imagine that Commander and Driver Hits would also resolve themselves before a battle, and I figure that crews would fix things like Weapon Malfunctions and Turret Jams before getting into a fight.
In any situation where a vehicle is immobilized and the enemy has taken the field, immobilized vehicles are basically lost. The enemy can deal with them at their leisure by using long-ranged weapons, artillery, etc. And that's assuming the tank crew is suicidal and won't bail out or surrender. So if you retreated or withdrew, say goodbye to anything that can't run away. Heck, even if you have control of the battlefield after a fight? As long as the enemy is in artillery range you can sure bet they'll take some parthian shots at your immobilized units.
While some of these situations are definitely better-served with other units, some are things that will happen to you regardless of whether you're on the front-lines or machine-gunning civilians pacifying the population. Things like strafing runs from flyers and artillery are, if anything, more likely to hit you right before you have to fight.
The talk of vehicles being immobilized here was by damage from a single or pair of mines/IEDs the vehicle had encountered by chance, or by a roaming platoon of infantry, none of which are situations where the vehicle has to worry about being captured.
-
A motive hit on a vehicle isn't going to go away, and if you're operating behind enemy lines, you'd better hope that no opposing units happen to spot you while you're attempting makeshift field repairs. Yes, you can probably still shoot back, but you're an immobile target. Of course, a gun jam or crew stunned critical hit is likely to be taken care of at the first opportunity, but a commander or driver hit is going to cause a longer-term reduction in effectiveness, even if it may not necessarily stop you from performing your assigned task (although a commander or driver hit on a one-man crew is going to leave the unit inoperative). Most crews are going to terminate the mission and return to friendly territory for the sake of the wounded, if they can.
Most bug-'Mechs are going to routinely engage and destroy any opposing infantry that get in their way, but a Savannah Master isn't designed for that role, and will most likely try to get out of visual range of the spotters as quickly as possible. A 'Mech can easily endure the scattered 2-point hits that a typical patrolling enemy Infantry squad will inflict (the odds of encountering a lone unit of field guns or battle armor set up in ambush far behind enemy lines is fairly remote), but a hovercraft would be at serious risk of immobilization, followed by capture or destruction at the hands of that same infantry unit.
Also, if pursued by enemy vehicles, a 'Mech can traverse terrain impassible to the vehicles. A hovercraft can only do that over water. Further, in broken terrain, scattered woods, or other areas with a lot of obstructions or hills, the 'Mech will be able to maneuver freely at maximum speed, whereas a hovercraft will often need to reduce itself to cruising speed, or else face a series of piloting checks to avoid becoming part of the terrain. While there are areas where a specific type of vehicle may be preferable, a 'Mech is a very viable option in almost all of them (swamps or open water being the primary exceptions).
-
Well, adaptable strategic mobility and endurance in front of enemy fire are the 2 key advantages of mechs in front of any other unit type after all. That goes both for assaults (both mechs and vehicles) and recon units.
-
Well, in the clans they can carry elementals right up to where they need to be of course. But beyond that, I've had a couple of fire falcons wrap up entire lances using the terrain and cover around them waiting for the enemy to give their back. Any light mech with an AC/2 and an SRM or 2 is pretty formidable, or just a couple ER ML's. A light mech can force a person o give up a position or just keep taking hits in the back, they can burninate the countryside and make smoke screens where you need them ahead of time, or deal with battle armour.
Revealing blips is great too. And tbh... most games I played in went by battle value, not drop tonnage outside of campaigns. Campaigns are a whole different beast but even then 2-4 lights can take the place of 1 heavy... especially if you are the ground defender or you start with cost and bv for formations.
But purely in the game itself, you can really open up a lot of angles and get them where you need them especially when players aren't used to dealing with some of the more deadly light mechs out there. It's not just panthers and hollanders, there's a lot of great light mechs to really mess with people's troop organization. They can completely disrupt static formations etc. Heck, I can't tell you how many crits or times I've forced someone to move out of a preferred position because I had a few fast moving light mechs.
But tbh ignore the ones with jump jets generally... generally I hate jump jets period they are waste of tonnage imo. But in light mechs you need everything in open ground speed, guns, and what armour you can manage to get.
-
Light mechs suffer from battletech being a game in the 3050+ tech levels. In reality, a light mech with hands would be a phenomenal infantry support unit, escorting infantry through dense terrain, and melee plus lasers plus fusion engine are a source of infinite damage on extended campaigns--a stinger can (slowly) knock down woods and bully infantry on patrol, while building fieldworks for attached infantry or clearing obstructions on a road. Also, a 6/9/6 stinger is faster than most tanks, and without gamey initiative rules a stinger could just keep pace with a slow tank and climb on top of it, never in arc of the turret, whittling it down similar to infantry swarming a tank in modern times.
-
Clan light mechs that pack ER PPCs or ER Large Lasers tend to be brutal against IS mech in open terrain since they have an easy time dashing around and sniping. Tough mechs can't close on them, and IS mechs of similar mass can't take the hits. Unless you've got something that can limit their mobility (whether that's terrain, map size, or something like Thunder LRMs), they're not easy to deal with.
-
Clan light mechs that pack ER PPCs or ER Large Lasers tend to be brutal against IS mech in open terrain since they have an easy time dashing around and sniping. Tough mechs can't close on them, and IS mechs of similar mass can't take the hits. Unless you've got something that can limit their mobility (whether that's terrain, map size, or something like Thunder LRMs), they're not easy to deal with.
For sure! But I honestly like the chip damage and mid-range builds. Any light mech with ER MK's and SRM4/6 can forcibly move enemies out of their positions and expose back shots etc. When I play Innersphere SRM4/6 and AC2's are my jam. AC2's are among the best light mech weapons imo, they have a reasonable punch with enough range that it makes them hard to ignore.
-
You think that the AC2 has a reasonable punch?What's your definition of insufficient punch?
-
Micro Laser.
lol but no seriously, the AC-2 has long enough range you can keep hitting things sufficiently to chip away at armour, with a light it means that during that closing period or just picking you can wear away at rear armour even. Ignore it long enough and it'll give you a nice opening for SRM's and ML's. If you use AP and they ignore you while you pick at them from behind you can cripple battlemechs.
I like AC2's on lights.
-
How many crits do you tend to actually score in a single game with AP-loaded 2-guns? And if the answer is greater than 0-1, how often do you get accused of using loaded dice?
If you're getting good use out of AC/2 ammo that's harder to hit with and only gets crits on a 12, then I want your dice. :o
-
How many crits do you tend to actually score in a single game with AP-loaded 2-guns? And if the answer is greater than 0-1, how often do you get accused of using loaded dice?
If you're getting good use out of AC/2 ammo that's harder to hit with and only gets crits on a 12, then I want your dice. :o
Ahaha... would you believe that's not the first time I've been asked about loaded dice? But seriously, it depends on who I am facing. If it's against a player who lets me keep chipping I can score 2-3 crits a game with it into rear armour before they are forced to turn their mech so I don't have a back arc anymore. But yeah most people won't let me get that much time on their rear table so about 1 crit a game is about right! Even though, that chip damage does help before I move in for SRM and ERML's.
It can really wreak havoc once you do finally commit the light mechs into the fight. A lot of people, well back when our club was still playing... but even on MegaMek I suppose! A lot of people end up taking equipment just to deal with the light and medium mechs I use to divide their attention. It ends up making really dynamic and interesting fights.
-
If you're getting good use out of AC/2 ammo that's harder to hit with and only gets crits on a 12, then I want your dice. :o
Uh, since when is AP ammo harder to hit a target with than standard ammo?
-
AP ammo has always applied a +1 penalty to the attack roll.
-
AP ammo has always applied a +1 penalty to the attack roll.
Yarp. A pretty worth it trade-off especially with clan gunner skill.
-
AP ammo has always applied a +1 penalty to the attack roll.
Considering its range, the AC/2 rather compensates for that pretty well.
-
AP ammo has always applied a +1 penalty to the attack roll.
Ah, I do not use it b/c the most useful sizes due to ammo bin have such a crit roll penalty so I never take it to table top. Then again a AC/2 field gun platoon with AP ammo on rapid fire . . . might have to try that- lifespan would match ammo availability.
-
Yarp. A pretty worth it trade-off especially with clan gunner skill.
Not with halving the amount of shots per ton and the huge penalty to the crit roll. I only bother with AP ammo for the AC10 on a regular basis, and only take it for other guns if I expect to encounter Hardened Armor.
Besides, the Clans only have access to it for Protomech ACs, which are hardly sniper weapons.
-
Not with halving the amount of shots per ton and the huge penalty to the crit roll. I only bother with AP ammo for the AC10 on a regular basis, and only take it for other guns if I expect to encounter Hardened Armor.
Besides, the Clans only have access to it for Protomech ACs, which are hardly sniper weapons.
. . . with the Wolf Empire taking most of the Marik Stewart Commonwealth, and them building mechs like the Shockwave to take advantage of the special AC ammo . . . at least they would be a Clan with it. Probably the Clan Protectorate too. Just that sort of availability update has not caught up to the 'current' timeframe.
-
Besides, the Clans only have access to it for Protomech ACs, which are hardly sniper weapons.
Would that ammo be compatible with the Improved AC-2 from S.O. (and original TRO 3050)? I would think it would. Getting a hold of that IAC-2 is another matter; I'm sure the Foxes found some old clan caches before the left for the IS
-
... wolf... empire? Is that some, dark age thing?
-
Yes. The Wolves migrated from their invasion corridor into the FWL, took a bunch of worlds, got double-crossed by the stupidest Archon the Lyran Commonwealth has had since Alessandro, took a bunch of Lyran worlds in response. Then they started pushing into the Republic of the Sphere (their original goal) from a different angle than the other Clans.
-
In the light mech versus Hover game, I recently used a Blade XR, with the twin Light PPC's and twin LAC2's with precision ammo (it has two tons for ammo, so begs for specialty ammo use) ... and I parked 15 hover tanks all over the table ...... on a side note, most of those were over water, as half the map was water..... and also the reason for so many hovers.....
I am now looking to paint it yellow, with blue checkerboard pattern, like a British police officer, and put the phrase "Lot Attendant" in red, down the leg......LOL
Nahuris