Advantages of light 'Mechs

[SCC]

  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.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

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.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

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.

[Kovax]

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.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

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.

[Paul]

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.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

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.

[Paul]

  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.

[Elmoth]

France hd a very static tactical doctrine I. It's armed forces. Nothing to do with politicians there.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

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.

[Maingunnery]

  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.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

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.

[Paul]

  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.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

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.



 

[Renard]

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?

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

  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.

[PuppyLikesLaserPointers]

  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.

[Greatclub]

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.

[Elmoth]

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.

[Elmoth]

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.

[RifleMech]

Didn't Belgium have their own forts which didn't stop the Germans?

[Rainbow 6]

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.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Belgium simply didn't have enough of a military to stop a determined land invasion.  They were too small a country.

[Minemech]

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.

[Minemech]

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.

[Elmoth]

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.

[Marveryn]

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

[Minemech]

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.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

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.

[Elmoth]

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.