House rules, med & long range modifiers

[Robroy]

Just found a group that is running a campaign game. We had 4 standard size maps for a 12 vs. 12 battle. After a few rounds the two sides had clustered into two groups of 6 vs. 6 on two of the maps, in both groups almost all the mechs where within about 8 hexs of each other, some getting kicks on others.

This reminded me that the game almost always ended up this, more a game of Rock'em sock'em robots than armored combat in the 31st century. So I was thinking of changing the range and attack movement modifies.

Here is a current example.
Two mediums with veteran pilots(gunnery 3) face each other at long range(+4), both walked(+1) five hexs (+2) total TN of 10. Not impossible, but not worth wasting ammo.

So what if we reduce the range modifies, make medium +1 and long +2. So in the above scenario it becomes.

Two mediums with veteran pilots(gunnery 3) face each other at long range(+2), both walked(+1) five hexs (+2) total TN of 8. Much more likely to hit. This would encourage more long range engagements.

Has anyone tried this?

[Alsadius]

A THN of 10 is worth "wasting" ammo on unless you have a mech with very shallow magazines. Given the odds of surviving long enough to drain the magazine on most units when ignoring THNs of 10+, it's a false economy. For LRMs, in particular, you'll almost never avoid having at least a bit of a range mod - might as well take the shot on 10+ when you'll never do better than 8+ against most targets.

Edit: I realized I never answered your question. I haven't tried it - it might be an interesting modification to try once or twice, but I doubt it'd be a huge improvement overall.

[Empyrus]

Haven't tried this but on paper... More hits means faster game resolution, so it is not a bad thing.
Similar thing can be accomplished with just boosting all pilots by giving them higher gunner and piloting skills. (eg use Veteran (3/4) rather than Regular (4/5) pilots by default

Given ammo vulnerability to explosions, using more ammo is better than not using it, usually, especially at mere to hit 10, i'm more leery of 11s and 12s. Only 'Mechs with less than ten shots may need to be careful.



Personally i'm inclined to take page from HBS BattleTech video game and reduce range bands to two, optimum and maximum, with 0 and +2 to hit penalties, respectively. Requires a bit more work to be sure, nominally optimal range would be half of maximum (round down), with some adjustments for certain weapons. Causes problem with variable damage weapons.

[Robroy]

Well in my example, they walked. If they run that is +2 and move 8 hexs  that is +3, currently that makes the TN  12, if you got a lite woods between them you are at +13.

With the reduced numbers you would be 10.

Also if you just change gunnery skill that will also change the short range to hit. So every thing is the same. I am going for more long range fire.

I am conservative with ammo holding for 9s, unless it is to good an opportunity like a backs shot.

[Sabelkatten]

I can see another simple change that should have about the same effect - remove running movement!

Think about it: you're dropping speeds, so lower maximum TMMs. Attackers can't run, so there will be more shots with low AMMs. And you'll be closing slower, so more opportunities for long-range shots.

You'll have to change the rules for MASC/Superchargers a little, but that's about it. :)

[Empyrus]

Modifying movement affects the game more than modifying range modifiers, if the system isn't modified as a whole to something akin how Alpha Strike does it. Walking over hills is different from running over them. Some 'Mechs can walk OK but it is running that makes them much less vulnerable (eg 6/9 moving 'Mechs).

That said, movement modifiers could be halved or modified rather than range modifiers, promoting movement more rather than promoting firing at distance. Eg Walking has no penalty, running has penalty of only +1, and maybe even add -1 standing bonus (heat values unmodified).

Modifying range modifiers is safe in that these effects are universal, unlike movement modifiers which depend on the unit much more.

[garhkal]

A THN of 10 is worth "wasting" ammo on unless you have a mech with very shallow magazines. Given the odds of surviving long enough to drain the magazine on most units when ignoring THNs of 10+, it's a false economy. For LRMs, in particular, you'll almost never avoid having at least a bit of a range mod - might as well take the shot on 10+ when you'll never do better than 8+ against most targets.

Edit: I realized I never answered your question. I haven't tried it - it might be an interesting modification to try once or twice, but I doubt it'd be a huge improvement overall.

Agreed.  In some battles i've not even burned through the whole 8 shots/ton for a gauss rifle, let alone both tons of ammo it has.. 

However, i DO like the change up, dropping the mods to +1/+2 vice +2/+4..

Or one option i saw..  Each weapon has its OWN S/M/L bracket.  To where LRMS, PPCs, gause rifles (and AC 2/5s) the LONG was their best range, medium had +2, but SHORT had the +4..  Where AC 10/20, SRMS and Large/medium lasers were reversed, to where it was normal..

[Daryk]

If you want longer range games, just introduce the Sniper SPA.  It turns Extreme Range into something easier than Long without the SPA...

[Alsadius]

If you want longer range games, just introduce the Sniper SPA.  It turns Extreme Range into something easier than Long without the SPA...

This might be interesting. Where's that rule located?

[monbvol]

A Time of War, A Time of War Companion, and Campaign Operations(compiled from AToW and ATowC) have Special Pilot abilities.

[Daryk]

They're in the BattleMech Manual too...  :)

[(SMD)MadCow]

We used these modifiers in my gaming group, worked fine. Long range sniper fire was a little more prevalent than normal but closing to short range was almost always best.