Vehicle of the Week: Harasser Missile Platform

[Grantwhy]

One downside to using Fuel Cells that might make them a poor choice (in universe) for a design like the Harasser is the reduced range compared to an ICE engine.

As best as I can tell, an ICE engine Combat Vehicle will have a range of about 600 kilometres - a Fuel Cell powered Combat Vehicle will have a range of about 450 kilometres. (I think Combat Vehicles use the same rules as Industrial 'Mechs on page 68 of TechManual)

For a Battletech game that won't make a different, but for a campaign game it might - especially for a high speed vehicle like the Harasser who will likely be attempted to go around opponents/flank them on a campaign map?

[SCC]

Unless this uses a support vee chassis and I missed it, this should have ten slots

[Martius]

Yep, you are right, I mixed it up.

[SCC]

Question is but: is 3.5 tons of armor too much?

[Wrangler]

Thanks for a another informative and funny article, Moonsword.

I always wanted to like the Harasser, but i keep turning to the Pegasus instead.

[Welshman]

I've been using the Harasser since 3026 first came out. The SRM version is a one shot crit machine. You run it behind cover and rush it out when it has the chance for a ridiculously good shot. And then expect it to promptly die.

The LRM version on the other hand is absolute gold. I've used these in many, many games to great effect. Back in the day when I was playing in the FGC, I almost always took a pair of the LRM variants into my battles with clan forces. Load two tons of standard Thunders and a ton of normal ammo. Their entire job was to race around the edge of the battle field and lay down mines to control movement. If they had a really great shot with the LRMs they would take those. Many of those battles the Harrasers came home from the fight as they never got close enough to the enemy to matter.

Honestly I have to wonder why anyone would still field the SRM version given how good the LRM version is.

[Colt Ward]

Which is why 2 MML5 and Fuel Cell has been talked about . . . let it rain!

[Welshman]

Which is why 2 MML5 and Fuel Cell has been talked about . . . let it rain!

Don't really see the point. The minute a Harraser gets under fifteen hex range, it becomes an instant target. At 15 hex range it has the potential to scream into zero hex range and there are few pilots willing to open themselves up to an SRM rain of death. So the Harraser has to die.

The LRM variant is pure low tech and ends up being at the bottom of the threat matrix most of the game. It's hard to hit and only has a single LRM10.

The MML5 version is a risk as it has the SRMs that no one wants to deal with.

[sandstorm]

Harasser can't trust that it won't be chased down by something fast. Having the up to 20 point SRM 'Get off' slap for anything fast enough to catch it is a deterrent. Besides, there aren't Tournament legal Inferno-LRMs to set stuff on fire to smoke out the folks in the heavy woods.

MML adds flexibility. Just LRMs risks you getting popped by that Spider or Venom that gets under your LRMs range and you might not be able to pull away from it before it does a number on you.

[Diablo48]

I like it, but the crew losses are somewhat...irritating so I would look to swap to a mess of rockets so there is less incentive for people to go after it once it empties its tubes.  If my math is right, you can pull the weapons for 8 RL 10s, a pair of Vehicle Flamers with two tons of ammo, and another ton of armor which should improve your survivability without sacrificing the ability to go shank someone or torch targets of opportunity.  Another possibility for a rocket variant would be to push the engine up another size so you have a longer threat envelope, but I do not feel like running the numbers to see if it would work.

[Moonsword]

Honestly I have to wonder why anyone would still field the SRM version given how good the LRM version is.

The fact that it's FWL-only comes to mind.  So does the merry carnage of watching them bury someone in Infernos, then get turned into burning rubble by return fire.

[va_wanderer]

Harasser can't trust that it won't be chased down by something fast. Having the up to 20 point SRM 'Get off' slap for anything fast enough to catch it is a deterrent. Besides, there aren't Tournament legal Inferno-LRMs to set stuff on fire to smoke out the folks in the heavy woods.

MML adds flexibility. Just LRMs risks you getting popped by that Spider or Venom that gets under your LRMs range and you might not be able to pull away from it before it does a number on you.

Besides, quad MML-3's weigh exactly the same as the dual SRM-6 racks it packs now, and massively enhance it's ability to pick and choose fights. Like most Harassers lived long enough to empty out one ton of ammo, much less two...

[Diablo48]

Besides, quad MML-3's weigh exactly the same as the dual SRM-6 racks it packs now, and massively enhance it's ability to pick and choose fights. Like most Harassers lived long enough to empty out one ton of ammo, much less two...

The point of having two tons of ammo here is not endurance, it is flexibility.  If it only had one ton of ammo you would have to choose between standard and Inferno rounds at the start of the match and be stuck with them, but with two tons you have the flexibility to pull a finishing critseeking strike against a damaged 'Mech or torch an unlucky tank depending on what is needed at the moment.

[Wrangler]

With all the new missile technology coming out, i'm surprise no one has decided (specially in the Free Worlds League) created a Extended  or Enhance LRM variant for the Harasser.  That would keep the little craft alive with it its problems with armor.

[va_wanderer]

The point of having two tons of ammo here is not endurance, it is flexibility.  If it only had one ton of ammo you would have to choose between standard and Inferno rounds at the start of the match and be stuck with them, but with two tons you have the flexibility to pull a finishing critseeking strike against a damaged 'Mech or torch an unlucky tank depending on what is needed at the moment.

Harasser 3070- 25 Tons, 10/15 Fuel Cell engine, Armor (3.5 tons standard)  F 15, L/R 9, B 8, T 15, 4x MML-3 (T), 1 ton MML LRM ammo, 2 tons MML SRM ammo, 482 BV, 1,042,500 C-bills.

<3 Fuel Cell engines. That's a cheap-o version, you could swap to HFFA armor for a little higher cost and better battlefield endurance, but at least that one can take a shot to the front or turret from even a big gun and keep going. And you could mix up the MML ammo, of course. Want a ton of Inferno or Thunder rounds, it's got the room.

And yeah, an extended-range LRM rack wouldn't work badly with these either...once they're out of the prototype stage.

[A. Lurker]

I like it, but the crew losses are somewhat...irritating so I would look to swap to a mess of rockets so there is less incentive for people to go after it once it empties its tubes.  If my math is right, you can pull the weapons for 8 RL 10s, a pair of Vehicle Flamers with two tons of ammo, and another ton of armor which should improve your survivability without sacrificing the ability to go shank someone or torch targets of opportunity.  Another possibility for a rocket variant would be to push the engine up another size so you have a longer threat envelope, but I do not feel like running the numbers to see if it would work.

Your math is off, I'm afraid -- the Harasser has only ten item slots, but eight RLs, two vehicle flamers, and the flamer ammo bin push the count up to exactly eleven. That's really the biggest issue with rocket launchers on vehicles, they're one of the very few weapons that make actually running out of space a real possibility.

One quick-and-dirty rocket-based refit I've considered is to simply replace only one of the SRM racks (and optionally half the ammo bin, circumstances permitting) with RLs while keeping the other. It's not really a huge improvement -- pretty much nothing that doesn't improve the design's sorry armor situation is --, but it shouldn't be too difficult a custom job and it offers potentially improved one-shot punch without consigning the hovercraft solely to the role of one-hit wonder (assuming it survives, of course).

[Sabelkatten]

1 ton armor, a LRM5 with one ton ammo, and 8 RL/10s - plink away until you've got a good target, then rush in and unload 80 rockets before getting out again and continuing to plink! :D

[Diablo48]

Your math is off, I'm afraid -- the Harasser has only ten item slots, but eight RLs, two vehicle flamers, and the flamer ammo bin push the count up to exactly eleven. That's really the biggest issue with rocket launchers on vehicles, they're one of the very few weapons that make actually running out of space a real possibility.

One quick-and-dirty rocket-based refit I've considered is to simply replace only one of the SRM racks (and optionally half the ammo bin, circumstances permitting) with RLs while keeping the other. It's not really a huge improvement -- pretty much nothing that doesn't improve the design's sorry armor situation is --, but it shouldn't be too difficult a custom job and it offers potentially improved one-shot punch without consigning the hovercraft solely to the role of one-hit wonder (assuming it survives, of course).

Eh, that is what I get for not checking my numbers.  Regardless, you can easily pull one of the rocket racks because more armor is never a bad thing, and to be perfectly honest I was looking to make it a one-hit wonder because once it empties its tubes there is no incentive for the enemy to shoot at it any more so you might actually get the little guy back in one piece unlike the stock variant which is an unfortunate combination of dangerous, lightly armored, and at short range every time it takes a shot.

1 ton armor, a LRM5 with one ton ammo, and 8 RL/10s - plink away until you've got a good target, then rush in and unload 80 rockets before getting out again and continuing to plink! :D

That would work, but it looses the ability to easily torch infrastructure which could be problematic.

[ArkRoyalRavager]

With all the new missile technology coming out, i'm surprise no one has decided (specially in the Free Worlds League) created a Extended  or Enhance LRM variant for the Harasser.  That would keep the little craft alive with it its problems with armor.

What's the point? Those are reserved by the splinter states for their choicest units, and the whole idea about the Harasser is a cheap mook unit that can use horde tactics.

[Wrangler]

What's the point? Those are reserved by the splinter states for their choicest units, and the whole idea about the Harasser is a cheap mook unit that can use horde tactics.

By 3090, their more in production than not.  You could have elite harrassing battalions of those things hosing in bound units, while your close in guys get in there finsh the job.  Expensive perhaps, but it would be powerful harrsing unit if they can stay out of the way.

[ArkRoyalRavager]

Why bother with it? If, as you say, Extended/Enhanced LRM variants are to be created, there are much better platforms available to the League states like the Saracen, Tufana and Stygian.

[ANS Kamas P81]

Well, if you got a spare company of Harassers lying around, you might as well get some use out of them and put the SRM6s elsewhere.

[ArkRoyalRavager]

MMLs or LRMs are the best. Especially an LRM Harasser firing SG missiles.

[Hellraiser]

I find myself favoring the Plainsman, Pegasas, & Saracen for the roles this thing is used for.

So that and not being a Marik fan, I really don't use it.