Unhappy with LAMs: brainstorming

[Maingunnery]

Defender has 12 Mechs and 12 ASF
Attacker has 24 LAMs

The attacker will have 2:1 advantage against enemy ASF, and the survivors [snip]

What survivors? Even with 2:1 numeral advantage, the LAMs are likely going to lose in space/air.

[Daemion]

Hence the desire to see them brought up to parity.

[Intermittent_Coherence]

Couple of things:
Why is Airmech mode so fast/broken speedwise? I get that maneuverability at speed suffers but why grant them that much increase in speed to begin with? Any insights as to the thinking that yielded that mechanic?

In three hundred years of Airmechs existing why did nobody ever try to duplicate the hovering capability on standard battlemechs?

Why is it that LAM's only get a ton of fuel? Is there no way to add more?

[Maingunnery]

Couple of things:
Why is Airmech mode so fast/broken speedwise? I get that maneuverability at speed suffers but why grant them that much increase in speed to begin with? Any insights as to the thinking that yielded that mechanic?

WiGE MP isn't as efficient as Jump MP. Each Jump MP allows for 1 hex of movement, but WiGEs often need to use multiple MP per hex.

Why is it that LAM's only get a ton of fuel? Is there no way to add more?

Yes they can, but existing designs are only designed to get in and get out.

[Atarlost]

The WIGE movement may be excessive even so. 

The Wasp and Stinger LAMs are 30 tons with 180 rated engines.  A 30 ton WiGE has a suspension factor of 80.  This would give 8/12 movement with some rounding loss.  The LAM rules give them 18/27.  But 30 tons is just below a suspension factor cutoff.  An 81 ton WiGE would have a suspension factor of 115 which would lat a 180 rated engine propell it to 9/14 with some rounding.  A 180 engine and 6 jumpjets weigh the same as a 225 engine.  A 225 would propel a 30 ton WiGE to 10/15 with some loss to rounding or a 31 ton WiGE to 10/15 with rather more loss to rounding. 

Depending on how one measures, the Wasp and Stinger are from 80% to 125% too fast.

The Phoenix Hawk LAM is 50 tons and uses a 250 rated engine.  A 50 ton WiGE has a suspension factor of 140.  This would give 7/11 movement with quite a bit of rounding loss.  The LAM rules give 15/23.  There is no higher suspension factor breakpoint to check against.  Adding the jumpjet weight to the engine weight it would wind up in between the 270 and 275 ratings.  Either of these would give a movement of 8/12 after rounding down. 

Depending on how one measures the Phoenix Hawk is from 25% to 43% too fast. 

I think the math safely shows that something is wrong with the rules for airmech mode. 

[skiltao]

Any insights as to the thinking that yielded that mechanic?

You could ask in the "Ask the Writers" area; I put it at 50/50 that the guy who knows actually answers vs someone else locks it straight off.

I suspect the idea was to make them fly off the mapsheet and therefore be unusable in pick-up games. High speed + turn modes = needs more than the usual 2x2 spread of mapsheets to fly behind anyone and turn around. (They play differently in Alpha Strike, of course, but I don't think they were thinking about that when writing the baseline rules.)

[Intermittent_Coherence]

The WIGE movement may be excessive even so. 

The Wasp and Stinger LAMs are 30 tons with 180 rated engines.  A 30 ton WiGE has a suspension factor of 80.  This would give 8/12 movement with some rounding loss.  The LAM rules give them 18/27.  But 30 tons is just below a suspension factor cutoff.  An 81 ton WiGE would have a suspension factor of 115 which would lat a 180 rated engine propell it to 9/14 with some rounding.  A 180 engine and 6 jumpjets weigh the same as a 225 engine.  A 225 would propel a 30 ton WiGE to 10/15 with some loss to rounding or a 31 ton WiGE to 10/15 with rather more loss to rounding. 

Depending on how one measures, the Wasp and Stinger are from 80% to 125% too fast.

The Phoenix Hawk LAM is 50 tons and uses a 250 rated engine.  A 50 ton WiGE has a suspension factor of 140.  This would give 7/11 movement with quite a bit of rounding loss.  The LAM rules give 15/23.  There is no higher suspension factor breakpoint to check against.  Adding the jumpjet weight to the engine weight it would wind up in between the 270 and 275 ratings.  Either of these would give a movement of 8/12 after rounding down. 

Depending on how one measures the Phoenix Hawk is from 25% to 43% too fast. 

I think the math safely shows that something is wrong with the rules for airmech mode.

So Airmech mode is just straight up 3x the MP? That's just wrong. It also leads me to a suggestion on how to change the mechanics.

WiGE's are fast, but their ground effect mechanisms are built in and optimised for their shape. LAM's OTOH essentially repurpose some of their JJ to provide lift and counteract the effects of gravity. Even the wings should not help much, unaerodynamic as the overall shape is. Hence I propose that the speed be cut by the amount of JJ needed to maintain lift.

In game terms, subtract 3 from the Jump MP and calculate the movement from there.

[Easy]

cleanup

[Intermittent_Coherence]

Although the obvious engine nacelles on the HK1 Airmech are horizontally oriented, the HK1 can lift vertically, from this pictured pose, without having to point it's nose in the air and ruin it's forward firing arc in the concurrent turn. Something provides enough thrust pointing straight down with the dangling legs to lift 50+ordinance, like bombs and AIV, tons straight up to hover.

Explain that.  :thumbsup:

This is why I recommend subtracting from the JJ MP to maintain lift.

[Easy]

cleanup

[Xeno426]

Well, an F-14 has a max takeoff weight of 74,350lbs...or 37 tons and an F-22 has a max takeoff weight of 83,500lbs or 47.75 tons. And both maneuver quite well. It's not too much of a stretch (given the IN-GAME technological advances) to bump that to a max of 55 tons.  Is it optimal?  NO.  Realistic?  NO.  It's a game.

You're confusing short tons (2,000 pounds) with tonnes (1,000 kg). The former is what you're calculating for those aircraft, the latter is what mechs are measured in.
For comparison, the F-22 is only about 38 tonnes.

It's not about weight, it's about wing loading. If you want to lift a lot of weight you need a lot of wing area. Just one of an F-14's wings is nearly the size of an entire Wasp LAM. Even if you could magically punch the lift coefficient up by a factor of 3, a 55-ton LAM is still going to have space problems. The wings have to go somewhere when they're folded up, and the mechanism for stowing them will take up space too. Bimodals can get around this a bit by having a permanently aerodynamic torso and treating the legs as landing struts.

Having the wings at all though is a huge structural liability compared to having some control fins that were fixed-in-place and using your giant honking fusion engine to provide the effort needed to get the thing into the air. If the whole LAM concept were started over from scratch and we ignored the influence of Macross on what the designs ought to look like, a sensible LAM would more resemble a Sylph battle armor than a veritech fighter.

(I don't see how "it's a game" is any defense to anything, frankly, any more than "it's a movie" excuses gaping plot holes or "it's an ice cream cone" makes pistachio taste good.)

The whole "not enough wing area" argument is rather obviated by existing aerospace designs with even less wing area, which can get much heavier than any LAM.
And "it's a game" is already a defense, otherwise mechs would float. Though it's more "it's a game of big stompy robots" as a defense, otherwise mechs would be the niche weapon of war, not the likes of tanks.

[Daemion]

And, whether you go by the Macross or Robotech stats (which were derived from the same source materials - or macross manual) the Valkyrie is only 15 tons. Dry weight. Nothing is mentioned on the weight of fuel or bombs. 

And, that's what the LAMs are derived from. 

Quite frankly, even BT conventional fighters lack in the lift surface department.

The Angel Light Strike Fighter - 10 tons


The Defender Medium Strike Fighter - 25 tons


The Meteor Heavy Strike Fighter - 45 tons

[Daemion]

The WIGE movement may be excessive even so. 

[snip]
Depending on how one measures, the Wasp and Stinger are from 80% to 125% too fast.

[snip]
Depending on how one measures the Phoenix Hawk is from 25% to 43% too fast. 

I think the math safely shows that something is wrong with the rules for airmech mode.

Well, remember that the early incarnation of AirMech rules had them moving like VToLs.  What kind of lift factor do you get for the same engine ratings there? 

And, Lift Factors aside - they explained on the outset of LAM design rules that it is the wings and other surfaces which provide the extra bonus to Jump MP. Of course, there was only one mode, back then, so the Wasp and Stinger had a VToL movement of 18 and the Pixie a VToL movement of 15.  No indicator of whether that was cruise or flank.

(I personally treated it as flank movement, with the matching attacker movement modifier of +2, and not the +3 for jumping.)

[Daemion]

Personally, I would have rather had AirMechs function similar to VToLs (or even fighter craft as if on low altitude for something different) with a cruise AMM of +1 and a Flank AMM of +2 instead of the +3 and +4 we get, and come up with some other ways to limit the AirMechs.  WiGE movement, while interesting, doesn't cut it. 

For example - one of the biggest problems with AirMechs, especially customs, is the ability to get into boot-to-the-head range, where you're one elevation higher than the target.  Even in WiGE mode, you can pull it off.  Potential shot to the head on the punch location table and a kick-induced PSR, to boot.  Combine that with Total Warfare's application of piloting skill to physical attack modifiers, and you have a lot of salvage-making cheese, right there.

Suggested fix - no physical attacks allowed in AirMech mode while airborne. The hovering nature of the jets and the computers running it keep the Mech from crashing accidentally, so that includes punches and kicks, and DFAs.  On the ground, it's no big deal, since the flight computer isn't active at that point, and the mobility loss for AirMech mode means you're not going to get a lot of damage in a charge. 

You might as well be in Mech mode if you want fisticuffs 


Example 2 - Are LAMs still allowed to torso twist while in AirMech Mode? If not, great.  If they are, well, then they really shouldn't.  One of the other big gripes of LAMs in AirMech Mode was the penchant to get in Back Shots with relative ease.  And, one of the methods was using the rules for torso twisting, which wasn't strictly disallowed in the original rules.

However a strict application of 'they function like VToLs while in the air' would fix that.  VToLs cannot torso twist.  It makes sense that while in the air, an AirMech's facing is not based on its feet but based on its nose, largely due to the nature of aerial flying.  Take away torso twisting, and you force the LAM to expend movement to line up its front arc or rely solely on arm weapons.

(I would like to point out that the Wasp LAM has no arm mounted weaponry, in spite of what you see in the art, so it is severely limited by such a restriction.  What is it carrying on its arm?  My guess is the fuel tank disguised as the medium laser so it still can look like a regular WSP-1A... until it opens fire with the head lasers.)

Those would be ample fixes for what really made LAMs broken.  No need to make a hit while in AirMech mode next to impossible.  Never understood why they went that route.  The Star League had ample time and development to make sure the AirMech Mode was more than a minor curiosity, and could perform on relative par with other units in perpetual motion, like VToLs.



On movement rates, I do have an odd suggestion.  It seems to me that the closer to the ground an AirMech is, the more it can take advantage of the WiGE effect, and move faster.  So, maybe it has five movement modes:  Walk, Run, Jump, VToL, WiGE.

In VToL Mode you get, say 2x jump MP but can fly around like a VToL.  You're assumed to be moving at VToL flank speed, with all the stability of a VToL in flight, as well. So, it only imparts a +2 AMM.

In WiGE Mode, you get 3x jump MP but can only move like a WiGE.  Due to the WiGE, the AirMech is more stable, and only imparts a +1 AMM.


But, I'm still largely in favor of dropping the odd movement modes altogether, and incorporating the fighter aspect of a LAM in AirMech mode where it has to spend thrust to keep in the air.  You already have a safe and max thrust stat for the LAM. You have movement restrictions and thrust costs in hexes.  You will notice that those values don't change between High Altitude/Orbit maps and Low Altitude maps, so it's a simple application of keeping the values the same while the AirMech zips around on the ground map.

Say that the Pilot has to use his Fighter Piloting Stat while airborne in AirMech mode, and he can't spend that on physical attacks.  It functions like a Fighter while airborne, so it can't torso twist.

And, viola.  You have something that incorporates the air game inside the ground game, giving the ground game one more unique element, and helping people get used to the air mechanics so that they could take to the skies at some point in a campaign, if they want.

[TigerShark]

.

[TigerShark]

And, viola.

[RifleMech]

I do not know why people still complain about AirMechs being too fast. Not under the current rules. Especially not when we have mechs that can hit 40 without Sprinting.

So AirMechs get 3xJJ for flight movement. Big deal. That MP is cut in half when moving at Elevation 2 or higher. The Stinger LAMs 27 hex MP is reduced to 13.  For a LAM at the slow end of the spectrum with just 3 JJ its even worse. That 14 MP is now 7. Yes that's slow but so's an UrbanMech. And LAMs can't use Overdrive, Evasion, or any speed enhancing equipment. Personally I'm okay with that but it's frustrating to hear people complain about AirMechs being fast when there's units a whole lot faster. Except for Savanna Masters no one complains about fast units. Even if AirMechs stay at Elevation 1 their "high" speed isn't that high. Not when AirMechs are required to use Turn Modes or face PSRs.  AirMechs either have to be predictable or risk crashing.

And trying to compare suspension factors to justify nerfing LAMs doesn't work. AirMechs can't use any speed boosting rules or equipment. Every other unit can. They also can't use XL or XXL Engines unlike every other unit. A J Edgar (11/17) with an XL Engine can move 15/23. As fast as some AirMechs and it still has tonnage left over for a supercharger to boost its speed up to 30, 38 with Overdrive. An XXL Engine engine can make it even faster or more deadly. All while weighing less than a Stinger LAM.  All by using technolgy and rules that AirMechs can't. All LAMs have is Improved JJs with doubles the weight and crits of their motive system and reducing other items. And converting to Fighter Mode isn't any help since opposing players always bring Aerospace Fighters just to kill the LAM.

Really the only thing LAMs have going for them is their price tag. They cost a lot less than other units with the high tech equipment. So why must people continue to try to nerf them? I don't understand.


Some other points of interest.

Additional fuel is 1 ton and 1 crit.
Physical Attacks in AirMech mode only do half damage. 

According to the Macross Compendium the VF-1 weights 13250 kg.  The maxium take off weight is 72000 kg with the FAST Pack System. It can also fly at 500 km in GERWALK (AirMech) Mode. Something no LAM will ever be able to do.

[Daemion]

According to the Macross Compendium the VF-1 weights 13250 kg.  The maxium take off weight is 72000 kg with the FAST Pack System. It can also fly at 500 km in GERWALK (AirMech) Mode. Something no LAM will ever be able to do.

Which is why I'm fond of the suggestion of using the thrust/MP system out of AeroTech 2, which was directly ported to Total Warfare.

I'm not wanting to nerf LAMs. I want to see improvements. But, the fixes I want in order to get those improvements are actually minor.  Of course, our group generally plays Special Pilot Abilities, especially made up one to fit particular special characters and do a lot of linked-game campaigns.  So, I have no problem putting something that isn't normally used into an SPA.  So, a LAM pilot who eventually gets one could be able to torso twist while in the air or make physical attacks, if we went with the two limitations I suggested.

I, for one, agree that the Fighter mode needs a boost. The fact that the Gyro appears to act as a giant fly-wheel with a shoe-brake on any or all of its axes to throw weight around is something that probably should be in use with the Aerospace mode, especially in space.  Or, for that matter, the shear stability of the mega-gyroscope (... it weighs at least a ton for most Mechs, and usually more...) means that it shouldn't take as much thrust to change its orientation. 

So, either MP savings for facing changes, or fuel savings, or something.  Next time I'm with my group, I'll inquire and see what they think. I have one person that might have an idea.

[RifleMech]

Which is why I'm fond of the suggestion of using the thrust/MP system out of AeroTech 2, which was directly ported to Total Warfare.

I'm not wanting to nerf LAMs. I want to see improvements. But, the fixes I want in order to get those improvements are actually minor.  Of course, our group generally plays Special Pilot Abilities, especially made up one to fit particular special characters and do a lot of linked-game campaigns.  So, I have no problem putting something that isn't normally used into an SPA.  So, a LAM pilot who eventually gets one could be able to torso twist while in the air or make physical attacks, if we went with the two limitations I suggested.

Sorry but I don't see how those are improvements. An AirMech isn't a fighter. At Elevation 1 its a WiGE with limbs. At Elevation 2+ its a VTOL using vectored thrust.

I don't mind Special Pilot Abilities but they're still limited by the unit they're piloting. You can't twist a torso when there isn't one and AirMechs can engage in physical combat.

I, for one, agree that the Fighter mode needs a boost. The fact that the Gyro appears to act as a giant fly-wheel with a shoe-brake on any or all of its axes to throw weight around is something that probably should be in use with the Aerospace mode, especially in space.  Or, for that matter, the shear stability of the mega-gyroscope (... it weighs at least a ton for most Mechs, and usually more...) means that it shouldn't take as much thrust to change its orientation. 

So, either MP savings for facing changes, or fuel savings, or something.  Next time I'm with my group, I'll inquire and see what they think. I have one person that might have an idea.

I would think that the gyro would make the LAM more stable in Fighter Mode which would be why weapons and equipment don't have to be mounted symmetrically. I don't know why it'd do more than that.

Fighter Mode is okay but the whole Thrust/Overthrust is broken in BattleTech. A friend did some numbers and if she got them right a Stinger LAM at 9 Thrust is only moving at Mach 1.25. I'm fine with that but that's so not fast enough for it or most aerospace fighters to reach orbit.

[Daemion]

Sorry but I don't see how those are improvements. An AirMech isn't a fighter. At Elevation 1 its a WiGE with limbs. At Elevation 2+ its a VTOL using vectored thrust.

But, an AirMech is based off a Valkyrie, which functions mostly like a fighter, but with hefty cargo bringing extra drag into the mix.

Where I'm coming from based on improvements is the stupid +3 and +4 movement mode modifiers for AirMechs.  Makes no sense, and is a huge nerf.

I generally dislike a lot of the new rules in interstellar ops.

Anything not that is an improvement.

But, we got to that point because a lot of the open holes in the earlier rules made for some interesting munch that many people facing it didn't like and vocally complained about.

Fighter Mode is okay but the whole Thrust/Overthrust is broken in BattleTech. A friend did some numbers and if she got them right a Stinger LAM at 9 Thrust is only moving at Mach 1.25. I'm fine with that but that's so not fast enough for it or most aerospace fighters to reach orbit.

Which means the space game needs fixed.

Nothing new.

But, the sentiment Fighter Mode is okay is counter to the original post's point.  Fighter Mode isn't okay. The Stock LAMs have all kinds of disadvantages against aerospace fighters in glaring ways, no matter the rule-set, with only not taking threshold damage crits as a noted bonus.

 

[RifleMech]

But, an AirMech is based off a Valkyrie, which functions mostly like a fighter, but with hefty cargo bringing extra drag into the mix.

Where I'm coming from based on improvements is the stupid +3 and +4 movement mode modifiers for AirMechs.  Makes no sense, and is a huge nerf.

I generally dislike a lot of the new rules in interstellar ops.

Anything not that is an improvement.

But, we got to that point because a lot of the open holes in the earlier rules made for some interesting munch that many people facing it didn't like and vocally complained about.

That's why AirMech's have a reduction in speed. Just like the Valkyrie. It goes from a max of Mach 3.87 in Fighter Mode to 500 km in GERWALK Mode.

I agree. The modifiers should be the same as those for other units.

I understand the reason for past hatred of LAMs and why the rules needed to be revised but things have gone too far in the other direction. Even their value in universe has been retconned.

Which means the space game needs fixed.

Nothing new.

But, the sentiment Fighter Mode is okay is counter to the original post's point.  Fighter Mode isn't okay. The Stock LAMs have all kinds of disadvantages against aerospace fighters in glaring ways, no matter the rule-set, with only not taking threshold damage crits as a noted bonus.

Aerospace Rules do need work.

The disadvantages for Fighter Mode I see are; hull breaches, slower top speed, no external ordnance and limited advanced construction options. I only see no external ordnance and limited advance construction options as a nerf. The others are because it's a Mech pretending to be a fighter. I don't have a problem with that and it does come with the advantages of better thresholding and structural integrity. Its the nerfs that bother me and they wouldn't if they weren't there just to make the haters happy.

[Daemion]

That's why AirMech's have a reduction in speed. Just like the Valkyrie. It goes from a max of Mach 3.87 in Fighter Mode to 500 km in GERWALK Mode.

So, a move from low-altitude where you're applying thrust to 500m hexes to the ground map where you're applying thrust to 30m hexes isn't enough of a reduction for you?

Seems big enough to me.

The disadvantages for Fighter Mode I see are; hull breaches, slower top speed, no external ordnance and limited advanced construction options. I only see no external ordnance and limited advance construction options as a nerf. The others are because it's a Mech pretending to be a fighter. I don't have a problem with that and it does come with the advantages of better thresholding and structural integrity. Its the nerfs that bother me and they wouldn't if they weren't there just to make the haters happy.

Okay. We seem to be on the same general page, as, since I dislike the nerfs from Interstellar Operations, that includes the restrictions to equipment choices, as well. (I have a custom WSP-LAM-105 in a mercenary campaign I'm still running. the FF armor made perfect sense as an upgrade.  Never agreed with the balanced placements of weapons, either, so I put the laser back in the right arm, so it functioned more like it's standard cousin, too.)

As well as external ordinance.

I don't recall hull breaches actually being a problem for a LAM, in any rule-set. It's easy to acknowledge as part of the Fighter part of a LAM.  They have the issues of losing entire locations, unlike a fighter. It would make sense that part of the tonnage behind a LAM's IS is to keep breaches from being an issue.

If that seems too powerful, I still think suffering breaches normally is still too much.  So, maybe a specific item is rolled for a breach instead of the entire location giving out?

I may have to try this out in a scenario with my friends, see what they think. We have an ongoing 5th succession war series of campaigns, and one is the Raven Alliance playing around with LAMs to bolster ground forces and space forces alike.

We've been playing around with 'advancements' in the process. This could be something to look into.

[RifleMech]

So, a move from low-altitude where you're applying thrust to 500m hexes to the ground map where you're applying thrust to 30m hexes isn't enough of a reduction for you?

Seems big enough to me.

Sure its big. That's why I don't think it needs to be bigger. But that's one of the biggest complaints, "AirMechs are too fast!" Personally I think they should be allowed to use thw Overdrive rules.

Okay. We seem to be on the same general page, as, since I dislike the nerfs from Interstellar Operations, that includes the restrictions to equipment choices, as well. (I have a custom WSP-LAM-105 in a mercenary campaign I'm still running. the FF armor made perfect sense as an upgrade.  Never agreed with the balanced placements of weapons, either, so I put the laser back in the right arm, so it functioned more like it's standard cousin, too.)

As well as external ordinance.

I don't mind some restrictions since I don't want LAMs to be too powerful. I like that they can be almost equaled with ridiculously expensive technology. That being said, restrictions can be hard to justify so restrictions should have some kind of work around or even limitations. An example being the same reasoning allowing TSM should allow ES and FF. That or having set critical slots like in the FrankenMech rules. Something to limit them but not rule them out completely.

I don't recall hull breaches actually being a problem for a LAM, in any rule-set. It's easy to acknowledge as part of the Fighter part of a LAM.  They have the issues of losing entire locations, unlike a fighter. It would make sense that part of the tonnage behind a LAM's IS is to keep breaches from being an issue.

If that seems too powerful, I still think suffering breaches normally is still too much.  So, maybe a specific item is rolled for a breach instead of the entire location giving out?

I may have to try this out in a scenario with my friends, see what they think. We have an ongoing 5th succession war series of campaigns, and one is the Raven Alliance playing around with LAMs to bolster ground forces and space forces alike.

We've been playing around with 'advancements' in the process. This could be something to look into.

I don't think hull breaches are problem for LAMs any more than they would be for normal Mechs. Without them having to pay more for sealing eliminating hull breaches would make LAMs too powerful.

[idea weenie]

Fighter Mode is okay but the whole Thrust/Overthrust is broken in BattleTech. A friend did some numbers and if she got them right a Stinger LAM at 9 Thrust is only moving at Mach 1.25. I'm fine with that but that's so not fast enough for it or most aerospace fighters to reach orbit.

For reaching orbit, you only need a Thrust rating greater than 1G with an air-independent engine, that can thrust for a sufficient amount of time.  That will allow you to slowly but steadily lift off from a planet's atmosphere and get into space.  Now whether you have enough fuel onboard to accelerate in space for a decent amount of time is another matter.  Can you share her math so we can see it too?

Remember that once you get in space, there is no top speed, you just have to spend thrust points to move to a new hex, ad those velocity points are marked on the fighter chart.  After that turn, if you want to change vector, you have to burn more thrust points.

[RifleMech]

For reaching orbit, you only need a Thrust rating greater than 1G with an air-independent engine, that can thrust for a sufficient amount of time.  That will allow you to slowly but steadily lift off from a planet's atmosphere and get into space.  Now whether you have enough fuel onboard to accelerate in space for a decent amount of time is another matter.  Can you share her math so we can see it too?

Remember that once you get in space, there is no top speed, you just have to spend thrust points to move to a new hex, ad those velocity points are marked on the fighter chart.  After that turn, if you want to change vector, you have to burn more thrust points.

Interesting. Does that mean such a craft can get into space or just the edge of it?


Sure. She as looking at the TRO:3025 LAM AirMech speeds in Fighter mode and trying to figure out how FASA came up with their numbers. She ended up dividing the listed speed by 10.8 kph (MP speed to travel 1 hex) and then dividing that by 17 (1 map sheet traveled by thrust point). Rounding up she got the number of jump jets. 


Battletech Stinger/Wasp LAMs (6/9)
Cruising Speed, Air:  1080 kph
Overthrust Speed: 1620 kph

Her numbers
1080/10.8/17=5.588
1620/10.8/17=8.823

Battletech
Phoenix Hawk LAM (5/8)
Cruising Speed, Air:  900 kph
Overthrust Speed: 1620 kph

Her numbers
900/10.8/17=4.901
1440/10.8/17=7.843


Going in reverse by multipling the number of jump jets by 10.8 by 17 gets slighly higher speeds but its still not the super fast speeds we hear aerospace unit travelling. And since LAMs use the same thrust MP as Aerospace units it throws the whole system out of whack.

[idea weenie]

Interesting. Does that mean such a craft can get into space or just the edge of it?

If it is using internal fuel to generate that >1G thrust, it can get into space as long as there is enough fuel for that level of performance (see any rocket built in the past 60 years). If the craft only uses a fusion reactor to superheat air for thrust, it cannot get into space (since space has no air for thrust).

Sure. She as looking at the TRO:3025 LAM AirMech speeds in Fighter mode and trying to figure out how FASA came up with their numbers. She ended up dividing the listed speed by 10.8 kph (MP speed to travel 1 hex) and then dividing that by 17 (1 map sheet traveled by thrust point). Rounding up she got the number of jump jets. 


Battletech Stinger/Wasp LAMs (6/9)
Cruising Speed, Air:  1080 kph
Overthrust Speed: 1620 kph

Her numbers
1080/10.8/17=5.588
1620/10.8/17=8.823

Battletech
Phoenix Hawk LAM (5/8)
Cruising Speed, Air:  900 kph
Overthrust Speed: 1620 kph

Her numbers
900/10.8/17=4.901
1440/10.8/17=7.843


Going in reverse by multipling the number of jump jets by 10.8 by 17 gets slighly higher speeds but its still not the super fast speeds we hear aerospace unit travelling. And since LAMs use the same thrust MP as Aerospace units it throws the whole system out of whack.

Air units IIRC have been given a special rule where in an atmosphere they lose half their current velocity each turn.  But since they can still thrust at the beginning of the next turn they can get up to 2* the speeds listed.  Also remember that the numbers she calculated reflect the ASF/LAM starting from a speed of near zero, to being able to travel the entire distance, rather than steady acceleration (steady acceleration means starting from zero to a speed of X kps, means you only travel a distance of 1/2 X).

Distance traveled = 900 km
Time = 1 hr
Cruising speed = 900 kph
This means they have to accelerate near-instantly from a speed of zero kph to a speed of 900 kph.
In reality, in the first minute the Phoenix Hawk could be accelerating at 2.5 Gs (rounding to 25 m/s^2 for ease of math).  Assuming starting velocity is zero, that means your final velocity should be 1500 m/s (25 m/s^2 * 60 seconds), if you accelerated the entire time.  1500 m/s converts to 5400 kph.

(As a side note, that 2.5 G acceleration at regular Thrust is ~60% better than the F-22 Raptor.  Here is a list of thrust to weight ratios.  Note that the F-22 barely gets up to 1.3 T/W ratio, while the clumsiest 100-ton ASF can get 1.5, due to using a 3/5 T/OT rating.)

Even more fun, if a LAM/ASF can get into the high altitude map each of those hexes is 18 km in width.  You do have lower altitudes having a speed limit.

(That Phoenix Hawk traveling 5400 kph would be traveling through 5 of those 18-km hexes per turn.  Hope it is high enough to survive the experience, otherwise it takes damage based on how much faster than the altitude limit is)

[RifleMech]

If it is using internal fuel to generate that >1G thrust, it can get into space as long as there is enough fuel for that level of performance (see any rocket built in the past 60 years). If the craft only uses a fusion reactor to superheat air for thrust, it cannot get into space (since space has no air for thrust).

cool

Air units IIRC have been given a special rule where in an atmosphere they lose half their current velocity each turn.  But since they can still thrust at the beginning of the next turn they can get up to 2* the speeds listed.  Also remember that the numbers she calculated reflect the ASF/LAM starting from a speed of near zero, to being able to travel the entire distance, rather than steady acceleration (steady acceleration means starting from zero to a speed of X kps, means you only travel a distance of 1/2 X).

Distance traveled = 900 km
Time = 1 hr
Cruising speed = 900 kph
This means they have to accelerate near-instantly from a speed of zero kph to a speed of 900 kph.
In reality, in the first minute the Phoenix Hawk could be accelerating at 2.5 Gs (rounding to 25 m/s^2 for ease of math).  Assuming starting velocity is zero, that means your final velocity should be 1500 m/s (25 m/s^2 * 60 seconds), if you accelerated the entire time.  1500 m/s converts to 5400 kph.

(As a side note, that 2.5 G acceleration at regular Thrust is ~60% better than the F-22 Raptor.  Here is a list of thrust to weight ratios.  Note that the F-22 barely gets up to 1.3 T/W ratio, while the clumsiest 100-ton ASF can get 1.5, due to using a 3/5 T/OT rating.)

Even more fun, if a LAM/ASF can get into the high altitude map each of those hexes is 18 km in width.  You do have lower altitudes having a speed limit.

(That Phoenix Hawk traveling 5400 kph would be traveling through 5 of those 18-km hexes per turn.  Hope it is high enough to survive the experience, otherwise it takes damage based on how much faster than the altitude limit is)

The speeds listed are the cruising and overthrust speeds. Doesn't say anything about from starting at zero. There also places in the rules where 17 hexes per thrust backs up her numbers. I'll have to try to find them again. I also know that the rules let aerospace travel faster the higher they get. Which is fine but if you look at her numbers they're close to real aircraft. A WWI Prop plane would move at 1/2, a WWII would move at 2/3 and turboprops would move at 3/5 and so on.


Correction.
She says inter. war aircraft would be 2/3 and some WWII aircraft could be 3/5. She says many would have a max thrust of 4 but isn't sure how to get that in game.

[Daemion]

[casts thread necromancy]

I stepped away from this mostly due to other things taking up my time, but I am still interested in some of this.

First off -

The speeds listed are the cruising and overthrust speeds. Doesn't say anything about from starting at zero. There also places in the rules where 17 hexes per thrust backs up her numbers. I'll have to try to find them again. I also know that the rules let aerospace travel faster the higher they get. Which is fine but if you look at her numbers they're close to real aircraft. A WWI Prop plane would move at 1/2, a WWII would move at 2/3 and turboprops would move at 3/5 and so on.


Correction.
She says inter. war aircraft would be 2/3 and some WWII aircraft could be 3/5. She says many would have a max thrust of 4 but isn't sure how to get that in game.

Let's summarize the Hex sizes for each map size:
Ground = 30m
Low Altitude = 500m (0.5km)
High Altitude/Space = 36,000m (18km)

17 hexes x 30 gets you 510m.  And, 17 hexes happens to be the basic single map sheet size for a BattleTech Map. That's where she's getting 17 from. 
It just so happens that two low-alt maps of 17 hexes each (technically 17.5, since there's a middle row unaccounted for when you set them up) adds up to 34 or 35.  Being 510 meters per map, that gets you very close to 18 km.  I bet they rounded up for fudgibility's sake.



Now -

Fighters!

If I have proposed it already, I still stand by the idea.  If I haven't, well, here it is.

AirMechs in fighter mode should be treated as ground units for targeting purposes only.  Conversely, to be fair, they can only target like ground units except for ordinance.

How does that work?  Remember that ASF units can only make strafing runs against ground units on a ground map.  That means the ranges that get while being airborne, against other airborne units, are lost against ground units, since they have to enter the hex (map) that the ground unit occupies. 

(Special note: this is actually good for VToLs, since they can go up to elevations that put them in different Low Altitude levels, but aren't allowed to move and interact with ASFs at Low Altitude values.  Probably because they don't have thrust/overthrust ratings.  Gives me an idea for an Airwolf style VToL/ASF.)

Because of that restriction, ASFs cannot target a VToL or AirMech at ranges to which it can normally target other ASFs.  It has to get into the target's hex and effectively dog-fight them or make a pass. It doesn't matter if they're at elevation 50, putting the VToL or LAM at par with the ASF's current low-altitude elevation.

I suggest that even LAMs in Fighter mode get treated the same way.  Not only in atmo, but in space, too.

They have the thrust/overthrust to move around at space/high altitude and low altitude, but they can only engage and be engaged in a dog-fight fashion by entering the hex they occupy.  The only way a LAM can get around this would be with limited external ordinance, or so I recommend.

This way, speed and being outranged doesn't matter.

I suggest that capital weapons, like from warships, can still target them as if they're trying to do ground bombardment, and misses should track drift distance to see if the shot still splashes a targeted unit. Direction is unnecessary, just how many hexes away it scattered.

Why would this be possible? 
It comes down to two things.  One is an inbuilt piece of equipment not found on pretty much any other aerospace unit.  The other is a particular point of view on the defensive capabilities and programs put into Mechs and other ground units.

Point of view - The verbiage that a missed shot isn't actually a failure to connect with the target, but rather a failure to connect in a way that causes hit point damage on the sheet.  Kinda how the creators of D&D described attacks working with the armor being the large determining factor if a hit caused damage.  (Interesting read. You should research it if you can.)  How does that work in BattleTech?  For me, it's mostly programming in the machines which use mobility along with the nature of the armor to turn hits into glancing, harmless shots.  This seems to be a function that only applies to ground units, who have the cpu space dedicated to a lot of this.

Key item - The Gyro.  As I've stated earlier, the Mech gyro is heavy, and not just for survivability.  I actually imagine it functions as a series of giant fly-wheels with shoe-brakes on each one, allowing the Mech to throw its weight around in ways that even we humans can't.  This is what keeps them from having to make a PSR with each weapon shot or hit, instead of only when sustaining 20+ points of damage while on the ground.

It functions independent of the ground, so a Mech can use the gyro to hold its position in air and space, and even use it to reorient its position by creative use of the weight-throwing method, it would make a Mech in open vacuum still just as hard to hit and damage as it would on the ground.

The fairness aspect comes from the same tonnage cockpit of an ASF and A Mech having the same cpu space dedicated to two different things.  I imagine that there's room for long distance navigation upgrades and flight control for the LAM, but probably not so much given to BVR targeting and tracking, except maybe for ordinance add-ons through hard points.

I really want to try this out, to see if it helps or overpowers.  If anyone wants to try it out, let me know how it goes.

The ultimate idea is that other ASFs may be fast, but speed doesn't matter if they have to come to you to shoot you down.

[RifleMech]

[casts thread necromancy]

I stepped away from this mostly due to other things taking up my time, but I am still interested in some of this.

First off -

Let's summarize the Hex sizes for each map size:
Ground = 30m
Low Altitude = 500m (0.5km)
High Altitude/Space = 36,000m (18km)

17 hexes x 30 gets you 510m.  And, 17 hexes happens to be the basic single map sheet size for a BattleTech Map. That's where she's getting 17 from. 
It just so happens that two low-alt maps of 17 hexes each (technically 17.5, since there's a middle row unaccounted for when you set them up) adds up to 34 or 35.  Being 510 meters per map, that gets you very close to 18 km.  I bet they rounded up for fudgibility's sake.

Thanks. Thanks to a thread in the aerospace forums we do have a slightly better understanding of Aerospace Speeds. Their being able to go twice their Safe Thrust is a good thing to know. Trying to figure out higher altitudes though...haven't gotten there yet. Or velocities.

Now -

Fighters!

If I have proposed it already, I still stand by the idea.  If I haven't, well, here it is.

AirMechs in fighter mode should be treated as ground units for targeting purposes only.  Conversely, to be fair, they can only target like ground units except for ordinance.

You mean LAMs in fighter mode?

How does that work?  Remember that ASF units can only make strafing runs against ground units on a ground map.  That means the ranges that get while being airborne, against other airborne units, are lost against ground units, since they have to enter the hex (map) that the ground unit occupies. 

Actually, they can strike and bomb targets as well as strafe them on the low altitude map.

(Special note: this is actually good for VToLs, since they can go up to elevations that put them in different Low Altitude levels, but aren't allowed to move and interact with ASFs at Low Altitude values.  Probably because they don't have thrust/overthrust ratings.  Gives me an idea for an Airwolf style VToL/ASF.)

Because of that restriction, ASFs cannot target a VToL or AirMech at ranges to which it can normally target other ASFs.  It has to get into the target's hex and effectively dog-fight them or make a pass. It doesn't matter if they're at elevation 50, putting the VToL or LAM at par with the ASF's current low-altitude elevation.

I wish that VTOLs could dogfight with aerospace units but according to the rules they are never above aerospace units even if they are higher. I disagree with it and use older rules that allow it but legal game rules says no.

I suggest that even LAMs in Fighter mode get treated the same way.  Not only in atmo, but in space, too.

They have the thrust/overthrust to move around at space/high altitude and low altitude, but they can only engage and be engaged in a dog-fight fashion by entering the hex they occupy.  The only way a LAM can get around this would be with limited external ordinance, or so I recommend.

This way, speed and being outranged doesn't matter.

I suggest that capital weapons, like from warships, can still target them as if they're trying to do ground bombardment, and misses should track drift distance to see if the shot still splashes a targeted unit. Direction is unnecessary, just how many hexes away it scattered.

So a LAM in Fighter Mode should be treated like a ground unit?

Why would this be possible? 
It comes down to two things.  One is an inbuilt piece of equipment not found on pretty much any other aerospace unit.  The other is a particular point of view on the defensive capabilities and programs put into Mechs and other ground units.

Point of view - The verbiage that a missed shot isn't actually a failure to connect with the target, but rather a failure to connect in a way that causes hit point damage on the sheet.  Kinda how the creators of D&D described attacks working with the armor being the large determining factor if a hit caused damage.  (Interesting read. You should research it if you can.)  How does that work in BattleTech?  For me, it's mostly programming in the machines which use mobility along with the nature of the armor to turn hits into glancing, harmless shots.  This seems to be a function that only applies to ground units, who have the cpu space dedicated to a lot of this.

There are rules for glancing blows in Tactical Ops. I don't think it has anything to do with the targets CPU as to the accuracy of the shooter.

Key item - The Gyro.  As I've stated earlier, the Mech gyro is heavy, and not just for survivability.  I actually imagine it functions as a series of giant fly-wheels with shoe-brakes on each one, allowing the Mech to throw its weight around in ways that even we humans can't.  This is what keeps them from having to make a PSR with each weapon shot or hit, instead of only when sustaining 20+ points of damage while on the ground.

It functions independent of the ground, so a Mech can use the gyro to hold its position in air and space, and even use it to reorient its position by creative use of the weight-throwing method, it would make a Mech in open vacuum still just as hard to hit and damage as it would on the ground.

I can kind of see using the gyro to make a LAM more agile in space but isn't the gyro to keep the mech more stable?

The fairness aspect comes from the same tonnage cockpit of an ASF and A Mech having the same cpu space dedicated to two different things.  I imagine that there's room for long distance navigation upgrades and flight control for the LAM, but probably not so much given to BVR targeting and tracking, except maybe for ordinance add-ons through hard points.

I think the LAM gained the long distance navigation with the 3 Avionics crits it gained. Of course I've yet to understand how the same weapon can have such vastly different ranges depending on what unit it's on.

BVR targeting and tracking?

[Daemion]

BVR targeting and tracking?

Beyond Visual Range.  Most space engagements outside one hex (18 km) are beyond visual range.

As for altitude values, they have those in Total Warfare, as well as AT2.  Would you like me to PM those values?