Author Topic: The AC/2... why use it?  (Read 27118 times)

massey

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2445
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #180 on: 18 January 2019, 14:39:35 »
massey, MM is pretty easy to set up now with customs if you are really interested PM me.

I'll tell you. Unit files are in directory/folder megamek\data\mechfiles. Just open a file with text editor (TextPad shows it right, Windows Notepad may have it wrong). I'll use file Clint_CLNT-2-3T.mtf as an example. There is this part:

Right Arm:
Shoulder
Upper Arm Actuator
Lower Arm Actuator
Autocannon/5
Autocannon/5
Autocannon/5
Autocannon/5
-Empty-
-Empty-
-Empty-
-Empty-
-Empty-

I'll delete all lines with Autocannon/5 and replace them with following:

PPC
PPC
PPC
Heat Sink

Then look up this line:
IS Ammo AC/5

And replace it with Medium Laser (Heat Sink works too). Then save file under different name. And with just that we'll have Clint who has exchanged its AC/5 and ammo for PPC, Medium Laser, and Heat Sink. That wasn't too hard now, was it? ;)

Thanks guys.  I may give it a try.  I'm about as tech savvy as the average caveman, so no promises.  But I might fool with it. :D

FrederickSteiner

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #181 on: 18 January 2019, 14:42:44 »
The onus is on the designer to abide by the gentleman's agreement that all units have visible flaws.

This is the snag on this one. Had a group a few years back where each player had to start with bone-stock 3039 tech, with the ability to customize with new equipment in-game if our individual merc units had enough c-bills, facilities, and tech time to perform the refits in-game. I took a stock SHD-2H and refit it to represent a 3039-tech prototype of a Bushwhacker, because I happen to LOVE that 'Mech despite its issues. Was it super effective (against really anything)? Of course not. But it was fun. Meanwhile, one of our other players kitted out 2 Awesomes with 3 GRs when they became available (he might've found a way to squeeze in a fourth on one, I can't recall), and completely trashed every one of us that played OpFor for him since OpFor was *always* stock. After that our GM said no customs, unless you sent the unit in-universe to a 'Mech production facility (with transportation costs and everything, plus that unit not being available for a set amount of time for transport and refit) that could do the rebuild and any customs had a quality rating penalty to balance the design. We all basically stuck to stock designs after that, because the min-max school of "I'm going to win no matter what" made the game not fun. And what is a game when it's not fun?

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19853
  • Cap’n-Generalissimost
    • Master Unit List
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #182 on: 18 January 2019, 14:45:35 »
Thanks guys.  I may give it a try.  I'm about as tech savvy as the average caveman, so no promises.  But I might fool with it. :D

you can also make custom designs in MML and save them to the \data\mechfiles folder in megamek (i usually make a \data\mechfiles\custom folder to make it easy to migrate after a new version)

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

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

Matti

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5085
  • In Rory we trust
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #183 on: 18 January 2019, 14:55:44 »
you can also make custom designs in MML
MML = MegaMekLab ; NOT Multi Missile Launcher. You should be able to find it as easily as you found MegaMek. HeavyMetal software series (Heavy Metal Pro/Vee/Aero/Lite/Battle Armor) files work for the game too and are official BattleTech license products which have been used to make official record sheet PDFs. Don't know about Drawing Board and Solaris Skunk/Armor Werks.
« Last Edit: 18 January 2019, 14:58:30 by Matti »
You know what they say, don't you? About how us MechWarriors are the modern knights errant, how warfare has become civilized now that we have to abide by conventions and rules of war. Don't believe it.

AdmiralObvious

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 223
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #184 on: 18 January 2019, 15:23:32 »
MML = MegaMekLab ; NOT Multi Missile Launcher. You should be able to find it as easily as you found MegaMek. HeavyMetal software series (Heavy Metal Pro/Vee/Aero/Lite/Battle Armor) files work for the game too and are official BattleTech license products which have been used to make official record sheet PDFs. Don't know about Drawing Board and Solaris Skunk/Armor Werks.
If you download MekHQ, it comes with the whole bundle, MegaMek, HQ and the Lab.

It's pretty simple to use as long as you know the rules and work with those little bugs the program might have.

The_Caveman

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1246
  • A Living Fossil
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #185 on: 18 January 2019, 15:32:54 »
For those of us who like to build customs, I wonder if we should think up a RAT of components. You have mumble tons of armor, a random selection of engines, and a big random grab-bag of weaponry. Everybody build your lance of customs out of those and have at it! Putting those defensive MLs on your heavy missile boat becomes more tricky when it means you can't put them onto your light harrasser because you only have five MLs for your entire lance.



I love it!  :D ;D

It's like the old Junkyard Wars TV series.
Half the fun of BattleTech is the mental gymnastics required to scientifically rationalize design choices made decades ago entirely based on the Rule of Cool.

The other half is a first-turn AC/2 shot TAC to your gyro that causes your Atlas to fall and smash its own cockpit... wait, I said fun didn't I?

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37351
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #186 on: 18 January 2019, 17:53:56 »
As I've said elsewhere, the best balancing system is a sane GM.  The animal spirits unleashed by unconstrained competition are why all the other less than optimal balancing systems exist.

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40828
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #187 on: 18 January 2019, 19:43:25 »
The animal spirits unleashed by unconstrained competition...

The above is the reason why, no matter what game I'm playing or how much I love it, i stay the ****** away from any kind of tournament. I play for fun and laughs, I don't need the hassle of folks who want to win.
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37351
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #188 on: 18 January 2019, 19:46:14 »
I only ever played in one tournament, and won it by gaming the scoring system (which was poorly constructed).  I'm not entirely surprised I never received the promised prizes.

Greatclub

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3061
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #189 on: 18 January 2019, 20:56:59 »
Back on topic, the Small Laser is the most efficient IS weapon in the game. Half a ton for three damage, one heat, no ammo. Nobody uses it because the range limits it's effectiveness too much.

The medium laser is less efficient than the small, but with triple the range is an excellent compromise between efficiency and effectiveness. It's the gold standard for battletech weapons.

The AC/2 is effective at delivering two point hits at long range, but as for efficiency... yeah, not. 

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4485
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #190 on: 19 January 2019, 06:20:42 »
:clap:  Got to agree with this. I got a few customs that I would love to play besides against the computer in MegaMek. Unfortunately some of the blame has to fall on us players as the system got abused. So the easiest way to prevent it was to say no customs.

I wouldn't blame all the players. There's always a few who have to abuse the system. Whatever system that is. And yes, saying no customs is the easiest way to prevent abuse. The problem is that some took it too far and won't use anything that isn't official. That eliminates a lot of areas to play in since there are no official units.


BV doesn't account for the synergies and design tricks that make custom units frequently broken as hell. Invent a better system for balancing matches than BV and you've solved the custom units problem almost entirely.

But one problem remains: canon units are always going to be inferior to customs because they're optimized for being interesting rather than winning tabletop matches. The onus is on the designer to abide by the gentleman's agreement that all units have visible flaws.

Who's to say what the flaws may be and why must there be flaws? Not every canon unit does and a poor pilot could be the unit's greatest flaw. And some players just have very bad dice karma. Give them every advantage, including rerolls and they'll still miss.

Quote
You give the devil an inch and he becomes your ruler: once the doors are open to custom designs, there is no incentive to use anything but custom designs and anyone who wants to adhere to the universe canon is at a disadvantage. And then you find yourself in a metagame death-spiral toward heat-neutral fully-armored 7/11 laser boats. Or whatever munchy combination reigns supreme in your tech era.

In a world where people play to win, interesting garbage like the AC/2 doesn't get used.

I think that depends on the player and the game. There's some canon designs I like as is and there's some I'd want to customize to my own tastes. It also depends on the game. I don't usually use customs in pick up games unless I'm experimenting.


You can play the game any way you want, as long as your friends are on the same page as you.

(snip)

I think the standard of "no customs" is fine when you're playing against somebody you don't know.  Besides, do you really need that pulse boat with an actuator enhancement system and direct neural interface?

I'd agree with that but it's gone beyond no customs to nothing not official. And there's some where none of that helps.


dig enough around the edges and you get to the root issue. i'm sorry you have to pay for the sins thirty years past of min-max powergamers, but far more people left the game because of clan TC/Pulse boats and other exploits (remember when people put piles of flamers on mad cats to bring the BV1 down?) than not being able to use a super niche, super short-lived weapon that really only exists as a historical placeholder.

I don't remember flaming Mad Cats. TC/Pulse boats were annoying but not a game  breaker for me. It was the Record Sheets and veiled accusations of cheating if one used hand printed ones. Yes, I know there were jerks who did cheat that way but just because a hand made RS doesn't match a computer made one doesn't make one a cheat.

For those of us who like to build customs, I wonder if we should think up a RAT of components. You have mumble tons of armor, a random selection of engines, and a big random grab-bag of weaponry. Everybody build your lance of customs out of those and have at it! Putting those defensive MLs on your heavy missile boat becomes more tricky when it means you can't put them onto your light harrasser because you only have five MLs for your entire lance.


Might help.

A friend and I tried rolling for "quality" with great quality being more upgraded and low quality being downgraded with common in the middle. Any further customization depended on what one had stockpiled, could salvage, or purchase on planet. But we had problems determining what planets would have what tech items available.


Sounds like folk I wouldn't want to play with. But if I were to encounter such people, I would have them agree to play with 'Mechs from Record Sheets 3039, and then I'd bring in Atlas (more even) with torso lasers in front arc. It's in original RS3039 PDF with Grasshopper Stormbringer in the cover page :smirk:

I don't. And we come back to Record Sheets. If you don't have them you can't use them.

Robroy

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1064
  • Not named, but not gone. Maybe.
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #191 on: 19 January 2019, 10:27:39 »
:clap:  Got to agree with this. I got a few customs that I would love to play besides against the computer in MegaMek. Unfortunately some of the blame has to fall on some of us players as the system got abused. So the easiest way to prevent it was to say no customs.

This makes it a little clearer my opinion. Grammar, my old nemesis.
« Last Edit: 19 January 2019, 10:29:13 by Robroy »

Warfare is the greatest affair of state, the basis of life and death, the Way (Tao) to survival or extinction. It must be thoroughly pondered and analyzed"-Sun Tzu

"Subjugating the enemy's army without fighting is the true pinnacle of excellence"-Sun Tzu

Simon Landmine

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1224
  • Enthusiastic mapmaker
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #192 on: 19 January 2019, 14:22:25 »
And some players just have very bad dice karma. Give them every advantage, including rerolls and they'll still miss.

I think I hear my callsign ...
"That's Lieutenant Faceplant to you, Corporal!"

Things that I have learnt through clicking too fast on 'Move Done' on MegaMek: Double-check the CF of the building before jumping onto it, check artillery arrival times before standing in the neighbouring hex, and don't run across your own minefield.

"Hmm, I wonder if I can turn this into a MM map."

brother elf

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 62
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #193 on: 21 January 2019, 13:29:19 »
That does sound pretty fun. You're probably gonna need a fairly large list though, depending on when you're building, and if any faction restrictions.

For the moment, I just RATted a medium lance and pulled it apart, and we'll see how that goes: https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=64147

BloodRose

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 151
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #194 on: 22 January 2019, 06:38:57 »
My biggest problem with the design rules is that it is all too easy to become abstracted from the fluff and universe and just start to see the Mech or unit as a pile of numbers and stats with no correlation to the actual unit. After all, that is in essence what a unit in BT is, once you strip off all the fluff and fun parts, numbers. A Marauder can be refitted to be a Thunderbolt or a Guillotine, an Atlas can become a King Crab with ease. The only thing that stops this is the players keeping in line with the spirit of the universe.
I remember when I first discovered SSW and started to make my own units. They where all optimised with near max armour, DHS, high alpha and syenergy weapons, etc. I stopped because they felt boring and when I played them they where unfun. Later, after reading more and becoming more mature I went back and built units around an idea instead of the numbers and these worked out a lot better. Sure they did not have the optimisation but they where fun to play. I found a good rule of thumb is to have an idea when building a unit, or to stick to the theme of a unit that you are modifying. Are you working on a Marauder? Okay, remember it is built around a heavy energy battery in its arms and a backup left torso piece. Are you working on an Urbanmech? Keep it as a slow mobile turret.

In all honesty this hobby has the sad factor of atracting the minmax autists, and it is not just BT. When I played 40K there was a regular opponent of mine who used to bring the most munchkin army you could imagine - massed Librarians to get all the good phsycic powers, the biggest tanks he could get, etc. I used to let people bring customs to a game for fun but I stopped after he started bringing things that where basically pocket primarchs but at a far cheaper price, or units that could melee an entire platoon to death in a single turn. And when Formations came out he was the person who brought triple Vindicator units with libby conclaves hiding behind them, turning them invisible.
In the end people stopped playing him because he was never fun to face off against, you always knew that whatever he brought it was going to be as optimised as possible, and a one trick pony that was not fun to play against (Not that this or blatant cheating ever stopped him from losing, but that is tale for another time)

I guess my point here is that custom designs and forces work so long as the person making them has the 'spirit' of the game at heart, or at least in mind. Once you lose this and start seeing things as numbers or stats you start to head down the munchkin route and eventually end up fielding lances of Gausszilla's and the 7/11 laser batteries another poster mentioned, and then you become less and less fun to play against. In the worst case scenario this kills your community. So, always remember this when creating a unit, don't create the heat neutral massive alpha monster, create something fun like a siege Atlas or a Warcrimes Catapult with MG ears (Big Ish, if you are reading this that CPLT better be underway). Keep the spirit alive, thankfully BT does not seem to be as plagued by That Guy's and Timmy's as other games, so don't become one.

As for AC-2's, there use depends upon your field of battle. In an urban fight they are useless, but with a good field of fire they can be laying down a steady barrage of shots long before the other side is within effective range to reply, and through armour criticals are a thing. If you are playing in the right era AP ammunition is also a thing, and nothing beats lighting off the AC-20 ammunition in the other guys Atlas with your tiny 2 damage AC before he gets a chance to use it.
>MOC - 3rd Canopian Fusiliers         >Capellan Confederation - Holdfast Guard
>Lyrians - 5th Donegal Guard          >Free Worlds League - 1st Oriente Hussars
>Federated Suns - 2nd NAIS           >Word of Blake/Comstar - undecided unit
>Draconis Combine - 1st Genyosha  >Clan Jade Falcon - Delta Galaxy
>Escorpion Imperio - Seeker Cluster >Pirates - Harlocks Marauders
>Mercs - Roses Heavy Lancers          >Mercs - Reinhold's Raiders
>Mercs/specops - Mausers Shreckenkorps >Mercs - Idol Squadron

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4485
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #195 on: 22 January 2019, 08:54:21 »
Unfortunately there will always be people who abuse the rules in order to win.  >:(

I for one like max armor. More protection is always good. I also like being heat neutral as its less to keep track of. Neither are mandatory though. For me the story of the why and how behind the custom is just as important. It either happens during a campaign or its has a history to it. That or  I'm just experimenting to have fun. It's no fun just maxing things out.

massey

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2445
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #196 on: 22 January 2019, 09:36:24 »
My biggest problem with the design rules is that it is all too easy to become abstracted from the fluff and universe and just start to see the Mech or unit as a pile of numbers and stats with no correlation to the actual unit. After all, that is in essence what a unit in BT is, once you strip off all the fluff and fun parts, numbers. A Marauder can be refitted to be a Thunderbolt or a Guillotine, an Atlas can become a King Crab with ease. The only thing that stops this is the players keeping in line with the spirit of the universe.
I remember when I first discovered SSW and started to make my own units. They where all optimised with near max armour, DHS, high alpha and syenergy weapons, etc. I stopped because they felt boring and when I played them they where unfun. Later, after reading more and becoming more mature I went back and built units around an idea instead of the numbers and these worked out a lot better. Sure they did not have the optimisation but they where fun to play. I found a good rule of thumb is to have an idea when building a unit, or to stick to the theme of a unit that you are modifying. Are you working on a Marauder? Okay, remember it is built around a heavy energy battery in its arms and a backup left torso piece. Are you working on an Urbanmech? Keep it as a slow mobile turret.

In all honesty this hobby has the sad factor of atracting the minmax autists, and it is not just BT. When I played 40K there was a regular opponent of mine who used to bring the most munchkin army you could imagine - massed Librarians to get all the good phsycic powers, the biggest tanks he could get, etc. I used to let people bring customs to a game for fun but I stopped after he started bringing things that where basically pocket primarchs but at a far cheaper price, or units that could melee an entire platoon to death in a single turn. And when Formations came out he was the person who brought triple Vindicator units with libby conclaves hiding behind them, turning them invisible.
In the end people stopped playing him because he was never fun to face off against, you always knew that whatever he brought it was going to be as optimised as possible, and a one trick pony that was not fun to play against (Not that this or blatant cheating ever stopped him from losing, but that is tale for another time)

I guess my point here is that custom designs and forces work so long as the person making them has the 'spirit' of the game at heart, or at least in mind. Once you lose this and start seeing things as numbers or stats you start to head down the munchkin route and eventually end up fielding lances of Gausszilla's and the 7/11 laser batteries another poster mentioned, and then you become less and less fun to play against. In the worst case scenario this kills your community. So, always remember this when creating a unit, don't create the heat neutral massive alpha monster, create something fun like a siege Atlas or a Warcrimes Catapult with MG ears (Big Ish, if you are reading this that CPLT better be underway). Keep the spirit alive, thankfully BT does not seem to be as plagued by That Guy's and Timmy's as other games, so don't become one.

As for AC-2's, there use depends upon your field of battle. In an urban fight they are useless, but with a good field of fire they can be laying down a steady barrage of shots long before the other side is within effective range to reply, and through armour criticals are a thing. If you are playing in the right era AP ammunition is also a thing, and nothing beats lighting off the AC-20 ammunition in the other guys Atlas with your tiny 2 damage AC before he gets a chance to use it.

Slow clap.

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19853
  • Cap’n-Generalissimost
    • Master Unit List
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #197 on: 22 January 2019, 10:29:35 »
I guess my point here is that custom designs and forces work so long as the person making them has the 'spirit' of the game at heart, or at least in mind. Once you lose this and start seeing things as numbers or stats you start to head down the munchkin route and eventually end up fielding lances of Gausszilla's and the 7/11 laser batteries another poster mentioned, and then you become less and less fun to play against. In the worst case scenario this kills your community. So, always remember this when creating a unit, don't create the heat neutral massive alpha monster, create something fun like a siege Atlas or a Warcrimes Catapult with MG ears (Big Ish, if you are reading this that CPLT better be underway). Keep the spirit alive, thankfully BT does not seem to be as plagued by That Guy's and Timmy's as other games, so don't become one.

ask a hundred players what the constitutes the 'spirit of the game' and you'll get 135 answers because a third of the respondents will start arguing with themselves and change their mind halfway through

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

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

Easy

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 591
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #198 on: 22 January 2019, 10:43:59 »
cleanup
« Last Edit: 29 May 2019, 16:49:53 by Easy »

Atarlost

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 559
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #199 on: 22 January 2019, 16:15:21 »
It only takes one downcheck to take any mech off the field.  The custom isn't worse off in that respect unless it's mixed tech.  And how do you have a spare mech?  If you're using maintenance checks they need them too which means more tech teams or you're making your readiness situation worse by spreading your techs too thin.  But you don't have a place to keep a spare mech.  Mech transport dropships have no spare mech bays and inadequate cargo even without trying to stick an extra mech there.  And if it eliminates four hotrods it has to be a dropship accident and everyone is either dead in a crash or trapped in orbit and your part in the mission has been called off. 

Apocal

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 548
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #200 on: 22 January 2019, 17:38:44 »
If I can put 4 Jeagermechs on the map for every 2 Thunderbolts, those Jeagermechs start to look pretty viable.

Since you're arguing from a position of fluff, Thuds are considered very reliable and less-maintenance intensive than other mechs, so it really doesn't make fluff sense to offer players that choice. If you just want to encourage your players to utilize otherwise mediocre stock designs in favor of optimized or custom ones, why not simply use BV matching? That is what it is there for, no?

massey

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2445
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #201 on: 22 January 2019, 17:46:40 »
Since you're arguing from a position of fluff, Thuds are considered very reliable and less-maintenance intensive than other mechs, so it really doesn't make fluff sense to offer players that choice. If you just want to encourage your players to utilize otherwise mediocre stock designs in favor of optimized or custom ones, why not simply use BV matching? That is what it is there for, no?

Back on topic, 99% of your fighting in a Battlemech is probably stuff that's too boring to actually play out on the tabletop.  AC-2s are pretty cheap, and they carry lots of ammo.  It does plenty of damage if your mission is "shoot that unarmored supply convoy", or "there are insurgents somewhere in that village, so stand on the hill and shoot those light buildings until they collapse".  Nobody wants to play that out, it's just an exercise in dice rolling.  But it would have real military utility.  You don't want to spend expensive LRM ammo doing something like that.  LRMs cost money.  The dead cost nothing.  I mean, AC shells cost less money.
« Last Edit: 22 January 2019, 18:42:47 by massey »

The_Caveman

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1246
  • A Living Fossil
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #202 on: 22 January 2019, 17:57:40 »
LRMs cost money.  They dead cost nothing.  I mean, AC shells cost less money.

Good point. A ton of LRMs costs 30 times as much as a ton of AC/2 shells and statistically will only result in 80% of the damage.

Brings to mind a quote surrounding one of the recent Middle East wars about the waste of using a million-dollar smart-bomb just to destroy a tent and a camel.

It is unfortunate, though, that the major use-case for a 6 ton weapon system is "off-screen" as part of background fluff or incidental RPG encounters.
Half the fun of BattleTech is the mental gymnastics required to scientifically rationalize design choices made decades ago entirely based on the Rule of Cool.

The other half is a first-turn AC/2 shot TAC to your gyro that causes your Atlas to fall and smash its own cockpit... wait, I said fun didn't I?

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40828
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #203 on: 22 January 2019, 18:09:03 »
You want fun? Run your players through a game that starts out as one of those boring engagements. Their mission objectives are to destroy a lightly defended village or supply dump while taking as little damage as possible. (Phrase this to encourage AC/2 units by telling them intel places some light LRM assets in the area) Little do they know that they're going to show up at the same time as an enemy patrol, and very quickly destroying the objective is probably a bust, and 'taking a minimum of damage' can now be more accurately described as 'getting out alive in any condition at all'.

See how much mileage they can get out of a Jagermech or Vulcan then...  >:D
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37351
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #204 on: 22 January 2019, 18:14:39 »
That depends entirely on the enemy patrol... my money will be on the Vulcan every time.

massey

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2445
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #205 on: 22 January 2019, 18:44:33 »
You want fun? Run your players through a game that starts out as one of those boring engagements. Their mission objectives are to destroy a lightly defended village or supply dump while taking as little damage as possible. (Phrase this to encourage AC/2 units by telling them intel places some light LRM assets in the area) Little do they know that they're going to show up at the same time as an enemy patrol, and very quickly destroying the objective is probably a bust, and 'taking a minimum of damage' can now be more accurately described as 'getting out alive in any condition at all'.

See how much mileage they can get out of a Jagermech or Vulcan then...  >:D

Yes, that's absolutely what you want to do.  Encourage them to take one of the least popular units in the game, then screw them over when they do.  That'll learn 'em.  I'm sure they won't stick to medium laser boats after that.

Apocal

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 548
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #206 on: 22 January 2019, 18:57:31 »
Back on topic, 99% of your fighting in a Battlemech is probably stuff that's too boring to actually play out on the tabletop.  AC-2s are pretty cheap, and they carry lots of ammo.  It does plenty of damage if your mission is "shoot that unarmored supply convoy", or "there are insurgents somewhere in that village, so stand on the hill and shoot those light buildings until they collapse".  Nobody wants to play that out, it's just an exercise in dice rolling.  But it would have real military utility.  You don't want to spend expensive LRM ammo doing something like that.  LRMs cost money.  The dead cost nothing.  I mean, AC shells cost less money.

Without a corresponding threat, it is even cheaper to use PPCs, since fusion energy is free and they are still excellent weapons against things that actually fight back, for those 1% moments that are probably 99% of your mech losses. AC/2s (75K) are cheaper than PPCs (200K), but not by enough to really matter.

You want fun? Run your players through a game that starts out as one of those boring engagements. Their mission objectives are to destroy a lightly defended village or supply dump while taking as little damage as possible. (Phrase this to encourage AC/2 units by telling them intel places some light LRM assets in the area) Little do they know that they're going to show up at the same time as an enemy patrol, and very quickly destroying the objective is probably a bust, and 'taking a minimum of damage' can now be more accurately described as 'getting out alive in any condition at all'.

See how much mileage they can get out of a Jagermech or Vulcan then...  >:D

That's approximately the issue people have with taking AC/2s already: if you're going to be brawling seriousface enemy opposition, there are usually better weapons to field.

Placed in the straight-up survival situation you're describing, the AC/2 won't shine. Assuming map edge retreats are in play*, the star of the show will be will be speed/mobility to extract yourself, first and foremost, followed by armor/durability to tank whatever damage gets through. And then you've incentivized players deploying their force with the idea that they might be in a brawl, regardless of what the scenario in front of them is.

*I'm not sure if it is standard play or not, but the last table scenario I sat was somewhat similar but with no retreating off-map. It was strictly surviving for 12 rounds.

massey

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2445
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #207 on: 22 January 2019, 19:03:26 »
Without a corresponding threat, it is even cheaper to use PPCs, since fusion energy is free and they are still excellent weapons against things that actually fight back, for those 1% moments that are probably 99% of your mech losses. AC/2s (75K) are cheaper than PPCs (200K), but not by enough to really matter.

That's true.  But I imagine that AC-2s require a lot less maintenance than PPCs.  I don't think there's anything in the rules to support that, but that's the sort of thing that should be addressed in background material.

Generally I think that energy weapons would require more frequent coolant replacement.  Just because you can theoretically fire forever doesn't mean you can realistically do so without cost.
« Last Edit: 22 January 2019, 19:05:07 by massey »

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19853
  • Cap’n-Generalissimost
    • Master Unit List
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #208 on: 22 January 2019, 20:07:36 »
If not a higher cost, more sophisticated tools and parts to maintain the PPC. Though maintenance of energy weapons must not be extremely difficult as they persisted through the 3sw. The real cost difference is probably mercifully abstracted in the form on lenses and transistors

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

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

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4485
Re: The AC/2... why use it?
« Reply #209 on: 22 January 2019, 20:17:24 »
The Heat Sink Failure rule would seem to back up that coolant does need to be replaced. That would increase the cost of energy weapons.

 

Register