As far as disconnects of fluff and rules I tend to be of the mind that players should be able to re-create scenes and actions from the fluff as much as possible otherwise it is pointless to have any link between the fluff and the game. Which includes artists should place weaponry correctly in the art.
This pretty much sums up what I'm looking for out of the game - not only that I can play out a game from the fiction, but I can narrate, in my own mind, the outcome of a game as well.
Basically, I'm looking for a narrative that the rules adhere to. We get that with Mechs. We get that with Tanks. We get it with Aerospace. But, Infantry rules don't have a coherent narrative.
I don't mind what narrative, as long as the one the rules conform to is logically followable.
If the support weapon is the reason why ranges are the way they are in a game of armored combat, then it stands to reason that infantry should have the possibility of losing that capacity early just as having it to the last man standing.
And, if support weapons are responsible for a large portion of a squad's damage, then there should be large drops in the Platoon's damage output when one is lost. Conversely, if there are only 4 support weapons and the damage output is much greater than 8, it stands to reason there should be shot groupings bigger than 2.
Here's a narrative that has defined BattleTech for me:
Every other combat unit in BattleTech is subject to the random loss of functionality before it's destroyed. Mechs have locations with weapons, mobility, power output, which get damaged or destroyed. Tanks and Aerospace have tables and external damage effects which can equally leave them immobile, out of control, down a few weapons and so on. It's consistent that no game will ever be consistent in outcome due to that.
Infantry are somehow devoid of that? Even in an environment with ambient ecm, there seems to be an implied accuracy required and that any support weapon can be picked off rather easily. Can't hit the guy directly? Most weapons seem to be powerful enough that all you have to do is get in his vicinity. And, then there are the indiscriminate attacks like artillery, High-Ex Missile Clusters, special explosive munitions.
If every other combat unit is subject to random critical effects, it stands to reason an amorphous infantry mob should be, too. They don't lose mobility, but they have something to lose in the small handful of support weapons they carry. They would lose range and/or damage output. Maybe be prone to stunning after a particularly horrendous attack while the survivors regroup and relegate a guard or two to watch after the wounded, and somebody unhooks the support weapon harness from Bazooka Joe to take over that role, since Joe lost his leg, but his weapon is still functioning.
A lot details of the narrative don't have to be tracked in the rules for the game, but if you follow the rules for a unit through construction and other aspects, a person should be able to paint a clear picture in their head what's happening, and fiction can expound on this.
That's why I have a hard time with the new Mechanized Infantry Rules. The narrative doesn't work.
I would have been fine assuming they were simply another form of Nebulous Motorized with an unspecified amount of vehicles that had a very specific motive type. That was undone by the blurb in TechManual about each squad having a single vehicle, making for a specific 4 vehicles per platoon. I could imagine that an AC20 was knocking out a jeep with 4 men in it when it hit the platoon out in the open, because it was plastering the jeep they were in and rendering the group a mission kill. That's not possible with only 4 vehicles in a platoon.
That's why I look askance on the fact that there are rapid fire weapons (ACs) that are only capable of taking out one guy, maybe two if they're out in the open which are strong enough to punch a hole in a big tank. If each guy in the platoon is armored up enough that it takes that kind of concentrated fire to take out one, or maybe two, then how is it that
flechette AC and Missile Munitions are able to do better? Surely the force with which a single AC bullet hits a guy is more than enough to send him flying and render him out of action for the duration of the battle. I have no problem imagining an AC is able to spread the love just as readily as a machine gun. Maybe not in 2d6 volume, but some of them should come pretty close.
What about LRMs using High Explosive warheads? And, yet only a cluster of five can take out a single trooper, maybe two if they're caught in the open.
A laser swept across a group of guys can't find enough weak spots in their armor, and so has to focus on taking out one guy, but a spray of plastic darts can do the job? A high-powered super-magnifying lense that is a laser can't hit a fairly decent number of guys, and merely cook them in passing, but a flamer can do the job?
Now, I expect some limitation to weapons that are dedicated to focused attacks on armored targets having some limitations in the number of guys they can take out, but not down to just one. The 'flechettes' I have some mild qualms against, but should allow for an AC to do more mission-kill casualties against people not wearing the fancy front line armor. They shouldn't be there just so you can have a reason for an alternate munition which plays the system that was derived. (They simply allow ACs to do full their full damage against conventional infantry, and unrandomized like most other anti-infantry weapons are.)
(Btw, LB-X cluster pellets are supposed to be explosive in their own right. They're not merely grapeshot, so I can give them a pass as effective anti-infantry weapons against front line troops on the 25th to 31st century battlefield.)
The narrative with infantry fails. That's what I want to see fixed.
(Aside: The narrative of randomized effects and damage is also why I had issues with Dark Age, especially with the singular combat dial for Mechs. Knowing that in a game of BT, a Mech could be stripped of all its armor and down to its last Internal Point in each location and still be fully functional, or have an arm and legs knocked off rendering it useless though it's far from destroyed made the repetitive and predictable combat dial 'not BattleTech enough' for me.)
