Author Topic: Remote Weapon Stations (RWS) (Read 15836 times)

Daryk · « **Reply #60 on:** 15 December 2019, 13:49:16 »

If missile launchers worked the way I'd like them to, it would go something like this:

A "Light" SRM launcher would have a range of 2/4/6, do 2 points of damage, fit in a 0.5 ton RWS, and be able to fire at 0-hex range.
A "Standard" SRM launcher would basically be a dual-tube "Light", have a range of 2/4/6, fit in a 1 ton RWS, inflict 1 heat, fire at 0-hex range, and roll on the 2 cluster table.
A "Heavy" SRM launcher would have a range of 3/6/9, do 2 points of damage, fit in a 1 ton RWS, inflict 1 heat, and be able to hit at 0-hex range unlike an SRM-2.
An MRM launcher would have a range of 4/8/12, do 1 point of damage, fire at 0-hex range, inflict 1 heat, and fit in a 1-ton RWS.
An LRM launcher would have a range of 5/10/15, do 1 point of damage, be unable to fire at 0-hex range (and in fact have a minimum range of 2 hexes), inflict 1 heat and fit in a 1-ton RWS.

Retry · « **Reply #61 on:** 15 December 2019, 14:14:47 »

Interesting.

Personally, I'd have just made the hand-held missile launchers equivalent to their vehicular counterparts. So a Corean Farshot LRM goes up to 21 hexes, and so on. That's essentially what I did for the infantry-scale TW weapon restatting I did a while back.

Daryk · « **Reply #62 on:** 15 December 2019, 15:45:24 »

I think a range reduction is in order since more of the targeting system has to be in the missile itself, but your way could work too.

RifleMech · « **Reply #63 on:** 16 December 2019, 13:03:49 »

There is fluff that says the 10kg SRM used by infantry is the same as that found in vehicles and mechs but it's never worked out that way. Except in the Combat Equipment table. Then Infantry SRMs were vehicle SRMs when mount on vehicles.

:( I've also read that the 2 shot does more damage over the light SRM because it's firing 2 missiles per shot. I don't know about the heavy. TM gives it the same damage as the light, yet it's got 2 shots, like the 2 shot SRM. You'd think the Heavy would be closer in damage to the 2 shot.

As for the reduced range, I've always fluffed it as that the infantry targeting systems aren't as good as those found on vehicles and mechs because they're so small.

Quote from: Daryk on 15 December 2019, 09:41:44

The real trick with the missile launchers (and part of why I cranked up their mass so much) is that their damage is limited by the Reload Factor for the hand held versions, which would increase their damage significantly. I'll try to work those out today.

Thing with infantry weapons is that they're all pretty much 1 shot weapons in TW. The conversion system has them firing at max rate in TW. They work differently in AToW. In AToW the Heavy SRM Launcher has 2 shots, the other's have 1.Then they need to reload.
What I haven't figured out is why the Heavy SRM Launcher does the same damage as the Light SRM Launcher in TW. It's firing more missiles per shot. It should do more damage.

Daryk · « **Reply #64 on:** 16 December 2019, 18:19:04 »

The reason the two-shot "Standard" launcher does more is due to the Reload Factor. The "Light" only has one. If either one had three "shots" in a magazine of some kind, they'd due ~1.5 points of damage, which would round up to the 2 of a "normal" vehicle/'mech scale SRM.

As I mentioned to Retry, I think infantry missiles have more of the targeting system in the missile than the vehicle scale weapons do, so they should either do less damage, or have less range.

RifleMech · « **Reply #65 on:** 17 December 2019, 05:01:52 »

Quote from: Daryk on 16 December 2019, 18:19:04

The reason the two-shot "Standard" launcher does more is due to the Reload Factor. The "Light" only has one. If either one had three "shots" in a magazine of some kind, they'd due ~1.5 points of damage, which would round up to the 2 of a "normal" vehicle/'mech scale SRM.

Thing is TM says the 2 shot and the light have 2 shots while AToW has the 2 shot and Heavy having 2 shots. So which has 2 shots? The Light or the Heavy?

Quote

As I mentioned to Retry, I think infantry missiles have more of the targeting system in the missile than the vehicle scale weapons do, so they should either do less damage, or have less range.

Well, MechWarrior 3 says that the heavy srm launcher fires the same ammunition as the vehicle/mech launchers. Even if they aren't the size of the missile's components shouldn't change. The difference is what's firing them and looking at things Infantry have the shortest ranges. There's only so much targeting you can put into weapons that weighs 10-30 kg.

Daryk · « **Reply #66 on:** 17 December 2019, 17:07:15 »

I think the problem is that TM didn't catch the AToW errata.

The missiles for the Light and Heavy in AToW only weigh 9 kg each, so something is clearly different.

RifleMech · « **Reply #67 on:** 18 December 2019, 02:29:46 »

Quote from: Daryk on 17 December 2019, 17:07:15

I think the problem is that TM didn't catch the AToW errata.

The missiles for the Light and Heavy in AToW only weigh 9 kg each, so something is clearly different.

Maybe?

Those are newer types. I'm not sure why they were added. Maybe because some were single shots?

Daryk · « **Reply #68 on:** 18 December 2019, 04:36:29 »

Maybe... I really have no idea other than I personally would have done it differently.

RifleMech · « **Reply #69 on:** 20 December 2019, 03:15:57 »

Quote from: Daryk on 18 December 2019, 04:36:29

Maybe... I really have no idea other than I personally would have done it differently.

One thing I'd do different is if a weapon, or ammo, is fluffed to be the same then it does the same damage. I'd also allow the other ammo types to be used. No averaging ordnance damages.

Daryk · « **Reply #70 on:** 20 December 2019, 04:30:42 »

I think they did the averaging thing to rein in ordnance. Anti-vehicle ordnance has AP 8.

RifleMech · « **Reply #71 on:** 20 December 2019, 20:26:04 »

Quote from: Daryk on 20 December 2019, 04:30:42

I think they did the averaging thing to rein in ordnance. Anti-vehicle ordnance has AP 8.

I think it's more so that infantry don't become too powerful. If I did the conversion right I got 2.34 damage. That rounds to 2 points per missile. Averaging the damages reduces the damage to just under half for the 2 shot and to a quarter for the light and heavy.

Daryk · « **Reply #72 on:** 21 December 2019, 05:42:33 »

With averages and before applying reload factors, the various ordnance classes do:
A: 0.47
B: 0.81
C: 1.44
D: 1.58
E: 1.71

RifleMech · « **Reply #73 on:** 21 December 2019, 06:21:06 »

Quote from: Daryk on 21 December 2019, 05:42:33

With averages and before applying reload factors, the various ordnance classes do:
A: 0.47
B: 0.81
C: 1.44
D: 1.58
E: 1.71

And there's the problem. Two actually. One; all the infantry SRMs use Ordnance E. Two; even those damages are higher than what's listed in TM.

Daryk · « **Reply #74 on:** 21 December 2019, 06:23:00 »

It's the reload factor that gets the damage to the TM values. 1/3 for the Light, and 2/3 for the Standard and Heavy (after errata).

RifleMech · « **Reply #75 on:** 21 December 2019, 06:45:23 »

Quote from: Daryk on 21 December 2019, 06:23:00

It's the reload factor that gets the damage to the TM values. 1/3 for the Light, and 2/3 for the Standard and Heavy (after errata).

I'm looking at the Third Printing PDF. It has damage of 1.14 for the 2 shot srm and .57 for the light and heavy srm.

Daryk · « **Reply #76 on:** 21 December 2019, 06:48:17 »

Because TM didn't implement the AToW errata that increased the Heavy to two shots...

RifleMech · « **Reply #77 on:** 22 December 2019, 00:01:35 »

Even if they had TM has the 2shot doing 1.14 for 2 missiles. That's a lot less than 1.71 per missile.

Daryk · « **Reply #78 on:** 22 December 2019, 07:39:11 »

That's the reload factor talking. 2 shots yields 2/3 of 1.71, which is 1.14. 1 shot yields 1/3, which is 0.57.

RifleMech · « **Reply #79 on:** 23 December 2019, 11:55:14 »

Quote from: Daryk on 22 December 2019, 07:39:11

That's the reload factor talking. 2 shots yields 2/3 of 1.71, which is 1.14. 1 shot yields 1/3, which is 0.57.

So the Heavy SRM should do the same damage as the 2shot SRM?

Daryk · « **Reply #80 on:** 23 December 2019, 14:59:44 »

After the AToW errata is applied to TM, yes.

RifleMech · « **Reply #81 on:** 24 December 2019, 03:07:50 »

That would be good. :)

Daryk · « **Reply #82 on:** 25 December 2019, 10:03:50 »

Hmmm... working through the various Machine Gun variations, I think I might add a rule for heat for them. Basically, 1 Heat if damage is greater than 1 at the TW scale. That would keep the RWS version from displacing the 'mech scale MG.

RifleMech · « **Reply #83 on:** 27 December 2019, 07:47:59 »

I'm not sure they'd be used. The biggest users of these I can see would be militia, police, security, poor mercs, and freedom fighters/rebels. They're more likely to be using Industrial Mechs of some type and they don't all deal with extra heat well.

I was thinking though, what if they were modified to rapid fire? That would help explain the added weight and the heat. As a nerf they could jam like ACs.

Daryk · « **Reply #84 on:** 27 December 2019, 07:54:29 »

Rapid fire is one of the things I'm trying to reserve for the TW scale weapons (so RWSs don't just outright replace them). I see RWS as relatively niche systems for close quarter fighting. They have the advantage of being able to engage at 0-hex range, which is pretty significant. Not that I like BA scale equipment, but I think of them as being like AP weapon mounts on BA.

RifleMech · « **Reply #85 on:** 27 December 2019, 09:02:37 »

I understand. I'm just not sure about how well they'd work or be used. I'm not sure a range of 0 is enough reason to want one. Machine Guns have them beat all ways and if they get to range 0 there's A-Pods.

Daryk · « **Reply #86 on:** 27 December 2019, 09:04:04 »

When were A-Pods introduced again?

RifleMech · « **Reply #87 on:** 28 December 2019, 07:13:46 »

Quote from: Daryk on 27 December 2019, 09:04:04

When were A-Pods introduced again?

TM page 204 says

Quote

Circa 2850 (Clans); 3055 (ComStar/Word of Blake)

It also says that the concept existed as long as the BattleMech and that crude versions had been tried over the years.

There's also Vehicular Grenade Launcher were are pre-spaceflight. TacOps page 315.

Daryk · « **Reply #88 on:** 28 December 2019, 08:39:20 »

Sounds like another "Rocket Launcher" situation. It would be nice if TPTB would give us some of those "crude versions"...

RifleMech · « **Reply #89 on:** 29 December 2019, 08:18:37 »

Quote from: Daryk on 28 December 2019, 08:39:20

Sounds like another "Rocket Launcher" situation. It would be nice if TPTB would give us some of those "crude versions"...

I so agree. :thumbsup: