A 3025 Thumper Karnov

[Lagrange]

There is a Thumper version of the Karnov in canon (and yes these are legal).  This one is a modification addressing two issues:

(1) A side arc Thumper reduces the already low survivability of VTOLs even further since there is a 1-in-6 chance of a critical hit.
(2) 1 ton of ammunition does not allow for multiple munitions missions.  Multiple munitions are handy, sort of like a 3025 version of an omni.

The cost of this is that speed drops to 7/11 instead of 8/12.  In compensation, this is a rear firing Thumper with armor arranged around that configuration.  As a consequence, this Karnov can escape at full speed while continuing to fire artillery.

Code: [Select]

Thumper Karnov 3025

Mass: 30 tons
Movement Type: VTOL
Power Plant: 70 Fusion
Cruising Speed: 75.6 kph
Maximum Speed: 118.8 kph
Armor: Standard
Armament:
     1 Thumper
Manufacturer: Unknown
     Primary Factory: Unknown
Communication System: Unknown
Targeting & Tracking System: Unknown
Introduction Year: 3025
Tech Rating/Availability: E/X-E-D-D
Cost: 1,053,000 C-bills

Type: Thumper
Technology Base: Inner Sphere (Advanced)
Movement Type: VTOL
Tonnage: 30
Battle Value: 248

Equipment                                          Mass
Internal Structure                                    3
Engine                        70 Fusion               3
Cruising MP: 7
Flank MP: 11
Heat Sinks:                   10                      0
Control Equipment:                                  1.5
Lift Equipment:                                     3.0
Power Amplifier:                                    0.0
Armor Factor                  40                    2.5

                          Internal   Armor   
                          Structure  Value   
     Front                   3         8     
     R/L Side               3/3       8/8   
     Rear                    3         14   
     Rotor                   3         2     


Weapons
and Ammo              Location    Tonnage   
Thumper                 Rear        15.0   
Thumper Ammo (40)       Body        2.0     

A VTOL Thumper seems to be fairly amazing.  It works over all terrain and can do high explosive (15/5 AE,F), cluster (10/1 AE,F, double damage vs. infantry), smoke (R1), illumination (R1), flechette (AE,AI, 2d6 to infantry in target hex), or fuel air munitions (10/5 AE, double damage+ vs infantry).  It's immune to counterbattery fire so you must attack directly with a unit.  In a direct attack, a Karnov Thumper can generate a +5 TMM shutting down almost all attacks, including ASF.  The only good counter to VTOLs I'm aware of is artillery which can direct fire flak out to a range of 17 with an effective +1+AMM (+3(direct fire)-2(flak)+AMM) modifier.  Most artillery units are however slow due to the requisite size and weight, making them vulnerable to indirect fire artillery.

The Snipe Racer is a complementary unit in several ways.

• The Snipe Racer is an excellent spotter unit for indirect fire artillery, able to easily stay out of range of guns while maintaining line of sight.
• The Snipe Racer is particularly deadly to ground units which are fast, since the 20/10 FAE bomb ignores TMM and is substantial to lightly armored fast units.  Focusing on moving units also increases the survivability of the Snipe Racer since adding an attacker movement modifier to a +7 TMM shifts a counterattack from hard towards impossible.
• The Karnov Thumper is particularly deadly to slow units since artillery can zero in on them and even misses can scatter to hit.

Given the relative cost, 13 Snipe Racers each with a FAE bomb has a similar cost to a Karnov Thumper so a swarm of super-fast VTOL spotter/bombers backed by highly mobile artillery piece is a solid combo (And for BV, the amortization point is at 3 Snipe Racers with a FAE bomb each).

On the subject of artillery, it's possible to put a Sniper on a super-heavy VTOL, but it doesn't seem worthwhile---the cost is much higher and the damage increase is more marginal.   The Thumper also has the virtue of having the most destructive ammunition per ton in the game with 20 shots doing 15/5 AE damage each.  If you just count the AE damage once per hex, that's 20*(15+5*6)=900. 

Edit: slight tweak per Daryk's suggestion.

[Daryk]

Good idea, but the armor needs work.  You should be able to take a PPC to the face before reversing course.  To get there, shave a point off each side, and one from the Rear.  Sure, a Gauss Rifle will crit you from the Rear, but it won't erase you outright.

[Luciora]

If you have a weapon that spans mapsheets, why are you letting the opfor get close enough to threaten you is what I want to know.

[Daryk]

Because the OPFOR doesn't always tell you where they're hiding... ;)

[Lagrange]

Good idea, but the armor needs work.  You should be able to take a PPC to the face before reversing course.  To get there, shave a point off each side, and one from the Rear.  Sure, a Gauss Rifle will crit you from the Rear, but it won't erase you outright.

Alright, done.  (And thanks.)

If you have a weapon that spans mapsheets, why are you letting the opfor get close enough to threaten you is what I want to know.

There are several reasons:

• The to hit number gets way better, moving from +7 to +4 (direct fire vs. ground unit) or even +1 (direct fire with flak round vs. airborne unit).  This has a huge impact on expected damage per shot.
• Guessing the location of opposing units rounds in advance is somewhat tricky if you have a mobile enemy.  Even if you were firing indirect, you would generally prefer to be on the same map to remove guess work.
• You don't always have a choice if an ASF is employed in a counterbattery role.  The good news is that you have that +1 direct fire number available and ASF can be vulnerable to damage in atmosphere.

Overall, there are a bunch of variables here which makes being on the same map as the enemy sometimes desirable.  Of course, there are many times when it's not desirable as well.

Because the OPFOR doesn't always tell you where they're hiding... ;)

Yeah, that too.

[Daryk]

That's a solid list (even without my suggestion)! :)

[Lagrange]

That's a solid list (even without my suggestion)! :)

Yeah, direct fire artillery can be quite a bit of fun :-)

Incidentally, I'm not precisely worried about a Gauss, since I'm trying to design for a 3025 force which wouldn't know about them.  The goal with armor here is just having enough that it's plausible to give out about when the rotor armor gives out.  There's a 30% chance of hitting the rotor and about a 50% chance of hitting the presented facing, so with 5 point hits, both the rotor and the rear facing lose all their armor at about the same time if the rear armor is 15.  This adjustment has the property that the burn through plausibly causes a rear critical (could be bad), but it also potentially allows you to swap facings to the front.  At 12 hits, you have ~4 on the rotor, ~3 on the rear, ~2 on front (with a change of facing), and ~1.5 on each side implying it's possible to use almost all the armor if damage happens to spread by expectation.  I realize that's quite unlikely, but it seems reasonable ideal to aim for in choosing how to place armor.

[Luciora]

Be nice to see if the new Karnov can look like a Puff

[Lagrange]

Be nice to see if the new Karnov can look like a Puff

That's kind of the 3039 version of the Thumper Karnov in canon.  It goes 8/12 and has a Thumper on the left side.  Ammo is halved and you lose a half ton of armor.  Between the loss of armor and the weak sides aspect it's pretty shaky in direct fire situations. 

Nevertheless, it's a canon artillery unit with high maneuverability.

[Luciora]

Yep, I have one kitbashed already.  Can't wait for the new release and get that one ready to bring the rain.

That's kind of the 3039 version of the Thumper Karnov in canon.  It goes 8/12 and has a Thumper on the left side.  Ammo is halved and you lose a half ton of armor.  Between the loss of armor and the weak sides aspect it's pretty shaky in direct fire situations. 

Nevertheless, it's a canon artillery unit with high maneuverability.