3025: Is the PPC the finger of god?

[deathfrombeyond]

You mean a "big toe on legs?"

I think he meant it looked like the big eye of some animal on legs. Maybe the eye of a sna...il or something. ;D

[ShadowRaven]

bah. It's  designed solely for penetrating walls.

[Sabelkatten]

From what I understand, the BV of a weapon is directly the result of Damage caused and Range (and possibly heat is factored in as well); the weight of a weapon specifically does *not* factor into the BV. So if weapon X weighs 3 tons and weapon Y weighs 8 tons, but they do the exact same damage at the exact same ranges, they will have the same BVs.

Weapon BV is calculated by adding together average damage of each hex of range (assuming TN 4 + range + weapon modifiers), with base damage modified for special properties (Headcapper, maybe some others). Damage and range are the only two values that figure in, as it should be.

[Fear Factory]

There is no denying that the PEHPEHCEH is a great weapon.

Want to make 3025 games really interesting?  Allow specialty ammo for AC's, SRM's, LRM's...  really fun stuff and it's something I've been doing for years and it works nicely.  Also encourages the use of weapons outside of the brainless PEHPEHCEH.

[LordChaos]

Not to put words in monbvol's mouth, but stats don't have to mean tonnage. You can play with the range, heat and damage without changing the canon designs at all.

Which is why I suggested, some time ago, in another thread, to just increase AC's range by an incriment.  AC20 now is 4/8/12 (though to be honest, even at 3/6/9 it's a beast), the 10 gets 6/2/18 (now matches the PPC, but instead of a minimum, you have ammo and chance to go boom), the 5 gets 7/14/21 (competes with LRMs... still looses the competition, but isn't quite as outclassed as it is by the PPC).  The AC2 becomes god of range.

[mutantmagnet]

The range increment of the 5 and 2 always bugged me.

Short range of the 5 should have been 7 and the 2 nine.

[Lyran Archer]

I much prefer LRMs. Your PPC is little good to you in an indirect fire bombardment where the missile boats are behind a hill and the spotter is too far away or too fast or is infantry.

[gooseman]

I much prefer LRMs. Your PPC is little good to you in an indirect fire bombardment where the missile boats are behind a hill and the spotter is too far away or stealthed or is a NARC homing beacon attached to your 'Mechs.

To which neither stealth nor NARC is around in the 3025 timeframe.

[Lyran Archer]

To which neither stealth nor NARC is around in the 3025 timeframe.

Thanks. Fixed my post.

I still prefer LRMs over PPCs because of indirect fire - even in 3025 when the spotter needs eyes on..

I also prefer SRMs over medium lasers because of Infernos - cooks 'Mechs, vehicles, and infantry in 3025-era.

...but I am crazy.

[Stormfury]

IME PPCs beat LRMs due to concentrated damage; Large Lasers beat both but are in turn defeated by Medium Lasers.

Part of this may be due to most 3025-era designs with Large Lasers being pretty good in and of themselves, but the Large Laser is an under-appreciated weapon.

Ultimately, everything can be beaten; BattleTech is a bit of a rock/paper/scissors game at times, and there's always the element of chance.

[Kobold]

Large Lasers beat both but are in turn defeated by Medium Lasers.

Except of course at ranges greater than 15 or 9, respectively.

[bakija]

I still prefer LRMs over PPCs because of indirect fire - even in 3025 when the spotter needs eyes on.

The problem with indirect fire LRMs in 3025 is that without TAG and semi-guided missiles, it is very difficult to hit things. Especially given that unless you are playing double blind, the targets of the indirect fire know where the indirect fire is coming from, and as such, it is a lot easier for the indirect fire-ees to avoid good range breaks of the missiles than it is for the indirect fire-ers to keep them in good range breaks, given that the LRM units probably have limited places to go and keep the cover they want.

A PPC isn't super dependent on terrain being favorable to work, and always does good damage. LRMs, less so. Especially in 3025 and trying to capitalize on indirect fire. In the more advanced tech era, where you can use TAG and semi-guided missiles, the indirect LRMs have a lot more of a benefit to make up for the general difficulty in pulling it off, so seem a lot more attractive in that time frame, for my money.

[Stormfury]

Except of course at ranges greater than 15 or 9, respectively.

If your plan is to stand around and alllow your opponent to destroy you without making any reply, something has gone horribly wrong.

The general point was that Large Laser-equiiped designs can mow down PPC and LRM-armed machines. The problem is that the Large Laser's range overlaps that of the Medium Laser to such an extent that forces based around Medium Lasers will in turn have little or no trouble handling a Large Laser force.

[Kiesel]

I would put a caveat in there, that a force fast enough to dictate range can negate that rock-paper-scissors effect, especially when dealing with ammo free weapons...   
a 6/9 large laser force can maintain that 10-15 hex range well enough to paste a 4/6 medium laser based force.   A lance of Phoenix Hawks vs a lance of Hunchbacks is an dead even match by BV, but I doubt it would be a fair fight.

[willydstyle]

Usually fights don't take place in long-range brackets, so the faster force with large lasers would be wanting to establish and maintain the 6-10 hex range band.

[mutantmagnet]

I would put a caveat in there, that a force fast enough to dictate range can negate that rock-paper-scissors effect, especially when dealing with ammo free weapons...   
a 6/9 large laser force can maintain that 10-15 hex range well enough to paste a 4/6 medium laser based force.   A lance of Phoenix Hawks vs a lance of Hunchbacks is an dead even match by BV, but I doubt it would be a fair fight.

Speed in 3025 play is "paper". Don't confuse the matter.