Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Polarized Lasers: An Aquatic Weapon for the Thirty-First Century

Introduction:
In the ever-evolving arms race of the Inner Sphere, technological innovation remains the lifeblood of military supremacy. One of the latest advancements to grace the battlefield—or more precisely, the underwater battlefield—is the "Polarized Laser." Despite its name, the technology behind these weapons involves complex refractive adjustments and thermal exchange mechanisms, far beyond mere polarization.

Development:
Developed by the secretive think tanks of the Federated Suns, the Polarized Laser was born out of necessity. The ongoing conflicts in underwater environments on planets like  Thalassa (an oceanic world of strategic importance because of its rich germanium deposits) demanded weaponry that could perform reliably under extreme conditions. Early tests with traditional lasers proved inadequate due to the scattering and absorption of light by water. Through a blend of misdirection in intelligence and cutting-edge optical engineering, developers created a system that not only works in the aquatic depths but excels.

Design and Features:
Polarized Lasers utilize a series of adaptive optics and specialized emission lenses that adjust the beam's coherence based on the density and composition of the surrounding water. These modifications allow for a tighter, more focused beam, significantly increasing both range and accuracy underwater. Additionally, the ambient water acts as a cooling agent, allowing these lasers to operate at lower temperatures and cycle faster than their terrestrial counterparts.

Specifications:
- Range: Enhanced by approximately 25% compared to standard lasers when used underwater.
- Accuracy: Advanced targeting algorithms compensate for refraction, providing superior hit probability.
- Cooling: Natural water cooling grants a 15% reduction in heat generation per shot.

Tactical Use:
The Polarized Laser is designed for mech and vehicular units specializing in naval warfare. Its ability to deliver precise and powerful strikes makes it ideal for engagements in oceanic trenches, around sub-aquatic bases, or in the murky depths of alien seas.

Drawbacks:
While formidable underwater, the Polarized Laser has severe limitations on land. The adaptive optics and emission systems are calibrated for use in water, causing significant performance issues in air:
- Range and Accuracy: Suffers a drastic reduction, with range decreased by up to 50% and a notable decrease in accuracy due to atmospheric dispersion.
- Cooling Efficiency: Without the cooling properties of water, these lasers overheat quickly, increasing heat generation by up to 30%, which can risk internal damage and reduce firing sustainability.

Strategic Implications:
These characteristics ensure that the Polarized Laser remains a specialized tool rather than a universal upgrade. Units equipped with these weapons are unmatched in aquatic environments but become vulnerable and less effective on traditional battlefields. This balance necessitates strategic deployment and careful consideration of terrain in battle planning.

Conclusion:
With the introduction of Polarized Lasers, the battleground has deepened, both literally and metaphorically. Commanders must now consider the depths of the oceans as arenas of war, adjusting their tactics and strategies accordingly. The Federated Suns' mastery of misinformation in naming this technology underscores the complex interplay of innovation and intelligence in the perpetual chess game of interstellar warfare.

Additional Fluff: Development of the Polarized Laser

Challenging Beginnings:
The origins of the Polarized Laser trace back to the tumultuous era of the Fourth Succession War, a time marked by fierce competition and innovation among the Great Houses. Initial efforts by the Federated Suns to develop a superior underwater weapon system were fraught with challenges. The prototypes, while promising on paper, consistently failed under the high-pressure environments found in deep-sea conditions. Engineers grappled with persistent issues such as micro-implosions within the laser's optical cavity, which compromised the weapon's integrity and effectiveness.

Clan War Innovations:
The turning point in the Polarized Laser's development came during the intense technological and military upheaval of the Clan Invasion. The Federated Commonwealth, a brief but potent alliance between the Federated Suns and the Lyran Commonwealth, pooled their resources and intellect to tackle the longstanding flaws of the laser system. Utilizing salvaged Clan technology, which was superior in both materials and miniaturization techniques, the engineers made significant breakthroughs. They managed to stabilize the optical systems and enhance the laser's pressure tolerance. However, despite these advancements, a significant barrier remained—the production bottleneck caused by inadequate 'spheroid manufacturing capabilities.

Breakthrough During the Jihad:
The chaos and devastation of the Word of Blake's Jihad, while bringing untold misery, inadvertently laid the groundwork for the final phase of the Polarized Laser's development. In the aftermath of the conflict, amidst the ruins and scattered technologies, the Federated Suns managed to secure advanced Clan-spec fabrication equipment. This equipment was essential for producing the high-precision components needed to finalize the Polarized Laser.

With this newfound capability, the production of the Polarized Laser was finally feasible. The weapon systems were refined, tested, and ready for mass production, just as the Federated Suns prepared to launch operations on the water-rich world of Thalassa (covertly referred to as "Aquilon" for security reasons).

Contemporary Use and Limitations:
Despite its advanced capabilities and unique advantages in underwater combat, the Polarized Laser has not seen widespread adoption across the Inner Sphere. The specific environmental conditions required for its optimal use limit its demand to planets and missions with significant aquatic theaters. While supremely effective in such scenarios, its drawbacks in atmospheric environments deter broader military use.

Strategic Value and Future Prospects:
The strategic value of the Polarized Laser lies in its potential to dominate underwater engagements—a niche yet critical aspect of modern warfare in the Inner Sphere. As oceanic worlds like Thalassa become more pivotal in military and economic strategies, technologies like the Polarized Laser could gain prominence.

For now, the Federated Suns continue to hold the edge in underwater warfare technology, with the Polarized Laser serving as a testament to their resilience and innovative spirit through some of the most trying times in their history. Whether this technology will spread beyond its current limited use remains to be seen, dependent on the shifting tides of demand and the evolving landscape of interstellar conflict.
2
He certainly MADE that roll, but for me, i'd have to say either Amos OR Drummer.  Bobbie  comes in a close 3rd for me.

Out of the Roci’s crew, Amos was definitely my favorite. I really enjoyed the additional layers he received as the show developed. Drummer was also high on my list. Her rise and fall and rise and fall and rise was incredibly satisfying to watch.


You can just jump from the show to book 7, they worked pretty hard to get the changes and plotlines original to the show to a point where there's minimal disruption.  Like, you should read all the books because they're great but you don't have to.

I think I’m going to start from the beginning just to make sure I have everything covered. I’m the world’s absolute slowest reader, though, so it’s going to take me a bit until I get back to where the show ends, lol.
3
Ground Combat / Re: Elemental (Fire) or Elemental III?
« Last post by Hellraiser on Today at 14:16:02 »
Fire-Resistant Armor shouldn't exist and stealth armor is much more interesting on top of being more fun.  Elemental IIIs 100%.

See, I'm the opposite.

Fire-Resistant is very Rare so I love seeing it.

And Stealth is sort of "Anti-Clan" so I certainly don't want it on my bog standard Elemental suits that are supposed to be common.

Now all that said on the Table Top, I'm using whatever fits the mission & BV allowed since I mostly use ANY kind of Infantry as filler BV to do an Infantry Job while also topping off BV.
4
Ground Combat / Re: Holographic decoys and field guns
« Last post by Hellraiser on Today at 14:10:19 »
Not sure how on earth you'd pull that off without your opponent getting suspicious...but go for it. If nobody shoots for the stars, there's no WarShips.

Maybe an Urbanmech or Hunchback decoy?

Not exactly some light bug but it would explain the lack of movement/shooting a bit.
5
So, the title says it all really.  But here's a little background.

I'm looking for canon combat vehicles (Tracked?) that can fit the role of MBT for a tank unit that is being moved aboard a Seeker class DS in those Light Vee bays that are limited to 50 tons for fast deployment.

Historically, in this role I've gone 1 of 2 routes.

1.  Use a combo of Myrmidons & Hunters
2.  Pack Heavy MBTs as Cargo.

But, I'm looking for new options for #1 that I might not know of.

There are newer TROs that I never memorized w/ units I'm not familiar with dating from the Age of War or the Republic of the Sphere eras, or, maybe there's just something I & haven't thought of or found yet. 

So Help Wanted!  Let hear it.  What's out there that qualifies as a MBT (or at least close to that) but fits in a 50T or less package?
   (Hovers need not apply..... as much as I love the Drillson, I am looking for Tracked for the most part, but let me know if there is a reason for something else)
Speed isn't an issue here, just looking for Armor+Firepower on a smaller frame.

Thanks ahead of time for any ideas you can give.  :)
6
Ground Combat / Re: Holographic decoys and field guns
« Last post by MoneyLovinOgre4Hire on Today at 13:52:26 »
Not sure how on earth you'd pull that off without your opponent getting suspicious...but go for it. If nobody shoots for the stars, there's no WarShips.

Doesn't matter how suspicious you are if you're dead.

Most likely I'm just going to go with a standard game with hidden units anyway.
7
What are some of the better/personal favorites for this duty? 

I can only answer for the "favorites" part in saying that my own A-BA Transports are almost exclusively the Maxim (CAR-4/12) & Karnov (CAR-6/8) in any game I play.
8
That was a very thorough post. Thank you for your insights!
Tragically, this forum doesn't have a Kudos or Reputation system...

I am definitely inclined to add more toys for underwater combat to try to mitigate some of the shortcomings, but so far all I can really come up with are a couple of ammo types and a couple of design quirks.
9
Fan Fiction / Re: Opalescent Reflections
« Last post by Daryk on Today at 13:34:45 »
VI at least... ;D

And I too was amazed at how much he had collected! :D
10
I think you should run your table under any rules you want. But let me witter on before I start pitching some changes for you.

Fit for Purpose
Quote
BattleTech's current underwater rules in a nutshell:
- Half of your weapons no longer work.
- You could catastrophically implode at any moment.
- If it makes you feel any better, your mech runs slightly cooler.
Sauce for the goose. Both you and your opponents will suffer the same penalties. If you fight an enemy on an open plain, the unit with ground movement and range will have an advantage. On broken terrain, a unit with jump jets and close-range weapons will do well. In space, victory will probably go to the one who brough LB-X autocannons and SRMs. Battletech is a game about the terrain as much as it is the units. Water is just another terrain, one that confers benefits and drawbacks for the player to utilize.

Woods hexes and elevated hexes and building hexes all provide ways to interact with advantages and drawbacks which force a player to make a choice when interacting with them. Some units will have more choices than others, but that's the paradigm and it's how games work: players make choices between options to maximize their chances of winning.

TacOps introduces a lot of additional types of terrain and weather to increase those options. The entire a la carte design philosophy of the Battletech game/franchise is based on adding more things to your game/campaign to interact with.

Water in Battletech does offer some choices:
-Units with heat sinks in their legs can dissipate more heat and enjoy partial cover in exchange for losing a lot of MP, having no cover, and a chance to fall.
-Units can take total cover unless another unit follows them into the water to have a knife fight on a parallel map with a lot of dice rolls.
-You can push/charge someone into water so that their hit locations without armor are disabled.
-It can be a less-desirable hex when compared to an already undesirable hex (say, Rubble).
-Fielding non-mech aquatic units.

So Water fulfills its basic game role of offering choices. Nominally. After all, having a battlemech fight entirely in depth two water isn't necessarily the point of having those rules. Like how salt is a great seasoning, but it doesn't make an edible main course. Are the water rules bad if they were only ever intended to be an all-but-impassible terrain type? Well, we have submarines and UMUs and MASS and torpedoes that tell us they weren't "only ever" intended for that.

The modern water rules feel like the result of the grinding of "let's have some water on the battlefield" gears, "we're creating a realized universe which has to include boats" gears, and "let's make some aquatic toys" gears.

So, does Catalyst need to overhaul BattleTech's water rules? I don't think the IP's success depends on it.

Would it be nice for players to have a set of water rules which create a more engaging experience when fighting underwater with 'mechs? Yeees.

The Purpose
So what's not fun about using 'mechs in water?
-PSR rolls: Slows down the game and drains MP that are already at a premium.
-Breach rolls: Slows down the game and creates a random element where any damage can suddenly become critical.
-Ranges/weapons: If you duck into water mid-fight, you might already be close to an opponent, but if you're not then you've got to spend several turns closing.
-High movement costs: If every hex costs 4 MP at least, then your movement options drop precipitously. You have fewer choices and the short range of your weapons dictate most of those options will be "waddle into range."

You don't need to change all of these to make water combat more engaging.
Changing breach and PSR rolls would make aquatic combat a slow slugfest between 'mechs' energy weapons.
Changing the PSR rolls and diminished weapons would make water an arena of quick death from low TMMs and frequent breach rolls.
Changing breach rolls and high movement costs would make fighting in water a push-your-luck slugfest of speed versus (limited) firepower.

Changes
So which rules you'd change depends on what you want that combat to look like. Just a few ideas:
PSR Rolls
-Only require PSR rolls for moving from land to water.
-Only make one PSR per turn for being in water.
-Allow a unit to spend additional MP instead of making a PSR for being in water.

Breach Rolls
-Make breach rolls harder, but give larger weapons/damage clusters a bonus that makes them more likely.
-Require a breach roll only for damage clusters above a certain level (say, half a location's armor)
-Instead of multiple breach rolls, make one hit location roll at the end of a turn a unit was hit. If that location matches one that took damage, then the location is breached. (Very bad for the CT)
-Auto-breach for ever so much damage.
-Forget breaches and just make a determining critical hit roll at the end of the turn for each location hit. Instead of flooding whole locations, individual components are flooded.

Ranges/Weapons
-Allow all weapons to fire underwater
-Allow torpedoes as alternate ammunition for LRMs, SRMs, & MMLs.
-Let energy weapons work normally underwater.
-Let ballistics shoot into/from depth 1 water.
-Let ballistics shoot in water with a reduced range for a fail chance.
-Give ballistics aquatic specialty ammunition.

High Movement Costs
-Reduce the movement cost for depth 2+ water by 1 or 2 points. Reducing it by two points would be a lot.
-Reduce elevation change costs for 'mechs in depth 2+ water by half and let them change up to three elevation at a time.

Patch-Fixes
You could also create equipment for working in water, which doesn't revise water rules, but allows units more easily to circumvent their effects.
LaSMs - Land-sea 'Mechs. Like LAMs, LaSMs can reconfigure themselves to operate well in the sea. They transform like LAMs and once they're transformed, the need to make PSRs is removed and MP cost for water hexes is reduced.
Hydro-Attuned Lasers - Lasers that do okay on land and okay in water.
AES for water - AES for your legs that lets you avoid making water PSRs. Or a feature added to existing AES.
VLMs - Vertical launch missiles. They can shoot from water to targets not in water.
Depth Charges - Missiles that can fire from targets not in water to targets in water.
[Unused fortification superlative] Armor/Structure - A type of armor/structure that better resists breaches or diminishes breach effects. Or an added feature to existing armor/structure types.

You could also let me run into water. It's not really related to your thing, but let me slam a 'mech traveling at 110kph into a lake. I can take it!

Caution and Conclusion
The issue is that if you're on a 'normal' battlefield and your 'mechs are optimized for land combat and your enemies are optimized for aquatic combat, then they might find a lake and sit on it while you each dare each other to come into your tiny sub-battlefield where you have the advantage.

Submarines and aquatic units might be at a disadvantage. They have a niche now and letting 'mechs work in water might obsolete them. Counterpoint: I don't care about vehicles and never will.

If you create weapons that fire from water onto land, it could be very annoying. Albeit, a way to irritatingly force an enemy into your favored terrain, which they aren't optimized for and creates a flailing, unfun way for them to win or a flailing, unfun way for them to lose.

Water rules are clunky, clunkier than they should be given how close they are to the core gameplay experience. But they're not too far out of spec. A full revision isn't necessary, but how you change them depends on how you want to change the gameplay underwater. The best way to tell if your changes are working is to playtest, playtest, playtest.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10