Why should I keep lower arm actuators on my Mech?

[Diablo48]

Essentially, the one reason to keep lower arm actuators if the hand on that arm is already gone...is that you may foresee the need to occasionally throw a punch with it after all and would rather have just the +1 to-hit penalty than +2 and half damage. (There are also some 'Mech melee weapons that explicitly replace the hand and still need the lower arm, though that special case may be a bit outside the scope of this discussion.) That's kind of thin since in most cases you'll only punch if you haven't been able to fire any weapons on that arm that turn and the target isn't in your front arc where you can kick it instead, but, whatever. I'm sure having lower arm actuators has saved some Warhammer pilot's life in just that fashion somewhere at some time. It's a big Inner Sphere with a lot of history, after all. :D

Well, statistically you would be better off punching with the hand and lower arm so that does not really count, however your comment about melee weapon requirements does actually provide a legitimate reason for mounting a lower arm without a hand so good job. :)

[A. Lurker]

Well, statistically you would be better off punching with the hand and lower arm so that does not really count [...]

Sure, and strictly speaking the Warhammer doesn't even have the "oops, my guns are too big to fit my arms otherwise" excuse. ;) In its case I blame aesthetics -- it was originally modelled after an anime mecha without hands, so it doesn't have any itself. Fair enough if your goal is in fact to model that machine as closely as possible, which I imagine was the idea at the time...rules-wise, assuming the rules do in fact reflect the game reality in that regard, one would think somebody would eventually figure out that handless 'Mechs with lower arms just for the halibut are kind of a silly idea. :D

[Scotty]

Well, statistically you would be better off punching with the hand and lower arm so that does not really count

Irrelevent.  The point is that having lower arm actuators is better than not having lower arm actuators for the purposes of a punch.  It is a good reason for mounting lower arm actuators when a hand might not fit.

[Diablo48]

Irrelevent.  The point is that having lower arm actuators is better than not having lower arm actuators for the purposes of a punch.  It is a good reason for mounting lower arm actuators when a hand might not fit.

The problem is mounting it costs you the ability to flip your arms which is usually more valuable either in dealing with backstabbers or not having to sacrifice mp to turn on fast movers.

[A. Lurker]

The problem is mounting it costs you the ability to flip your arms which is usually more valuable either in dealing with backstabbers or not having to sacrifice mp to turn on fast movers.

To be fair, you only have the ability to flip your arms if you sacrifice both arms' lower arm and hand actuators, anyway. That's not insignificant because you basically give up on ever using your design's arms as arms.

I think we may need to differentiate here a bit. If both arms are handless to begin with, then the case for also omitting the lower arm actuators looks stronger (due to thereby gaining the flipping ability above) than if one arm keeps the full set of actuators and it's only the other that for some reason has to make do without a hand.

[Onisuzume]

Anyone mentioned crit paddng yet?
It ain't much, but it's something, I guess.

[pensiveswetness]

lets look at things from the fluff POV:

lets take the Whitworth, originally made by the Whitworth company. they offer a product that lacks HA's. why? because that's the specs they came up with, their designers agreed with and the part suppliers could supply them.

now with that rational, can any of you think of how many real world products, good, bad and Apple, share some of the same WTF moments that customers of a Whitworth might argee with you, a thousand years in the future. They would be saying the exact same thing: Why did i buy a Ford Explorer/Whitworth when i could have bought a Camry/Cicada...?

 ;D even though i think the price comparisons are not the same... but i dont recall ever hearing about Cicada's rolling over much.

[Diablo48]

To be fair, you only have the ability to flip your arms if you sacrifice both arms' lower arm and hand actuators, anyway. That's not insignificant because you basically give up on ever using your design's arms as arms.

I think we may need to differentiate here a bit. If both arms are handless to begin with, then the case for also omitting the lower arm actuators looks stronger (due to thereby gaining the flipping ability above) than if one arm keeps the full set of actuators and it's only the other that for some reason has to make do without a hand.

I actually mentioned this case earlier.  You have a small window where you absolutely need one crit and still want to melee so you can compromise and pull one hand, but if you get to the point that you need to loose both hands you are probably better off going for flippable arms and relying on kicks in close quarters combat.  After all, besides punches the things you really want arms for require hands so loosing both of them kind of kills the point of having your arms be anything other than turrets.

[Railan Sradac]

As I've been testing some physical brawler 'Mechs recently, you can't take Claws with Hand actuators. Bit harsh on your TNs, but I can get two 26-point smacks on something that jumps 6. Quite good if you can use your jump speed to get in their back arc as you can carve off whole torsos with that kind of damage.

[A. Lurker]

As I've been testing some physical brawler 'Mechs recently, you can't take Claws with Hand actuators. Bit harsh on your TNs, but I can get two 26-point smacks on something that jumps 6. Quite good if you can use your jump speed to get in their back arc as you can carve off whole torsos with that kind of damage.

Well, yeah. You can't take claws with hand actuators because claws are hand actuators -- it'd be like suddenly deciding your 'Mech needs two hands on each arm. (Which, come to think of it, makes for interesting imagery in and of itself...) :)

[Legion]

Well, yeah. You can't take claws with hand actuators because claws are hand actuators -- it'd be like suddenly deciding your 'Mech needs two hands on each arm. (Which, come to think of it, makes for interesting imagery in and of itself...) :)

Better yet, four arms!  Hold with two, beat on face with two, just like Goro/Kintaro!

[Mattlov]

The problem is mounting it costs you the ability to flip your arms which is usually more valuable either in dealing with backstabbers or not having to sacrifice mp to turn on fast movers.

You can still torso twist and get an arm behind you with lower arms.  If you let something that dangerous behind you that needs BOTH arms to shoo away, you need to work on your tactics more than your arm actuators. O0

[Diablo48]

You can still torso twist and get an arm behind you with lower arms.  If you let something that dangerous behind you that needs BOTH arms to shoo away, you need to work on your tactics more than your arm actuators. O0

That is as much discouragement as it is an attack.  After all, knowing that Dire Wolf can still hit you with the vast majority of its firepower if you get behind it is a very good reason not to try it.

[Mattlov]

Being able to flip your arms like that also provides an advantage to the ENEMY.  If you are known to flip your arms when someone gets behind you, you have greatly diminished your forces FORWARD firepower with no loss to their own.  So the enemy can concentrate fire and eliminate a more valuable unit of yours while you have devoted a 'Mech to eliminate what is most likely just a nuisance.

Torso twisting will let you still bring firepower forward against the enemy as well as threatening the thing behind you.

[Diablo48]

Being able to flip your arms like that also provides an advantage to the ENEMY.  If you are known to flip your arms when someone gets behind you, you have greatly diminished your forces FORWARD firepower with no loss to their own.  So the enemy can concentrate fire and eliminate a more valuable unit of yours while you have devoted a 'Mech to eliminate what is most likely just a nuisance.

Torso twisting will let you still bring firepower forward against the enemy as well as threatening the thing behind you.

Um, do not be an idiot then?  If there is a major threat in front of you and a minor nuisance behind you then you should just ignore the nuisance and dispatch the bigger threat.  The arm flipping is just an extra option which makes you better able to respond to enemies behind you.  The only thing it costs you is the ability to punch which is usually not a problem because kicks are generally better.

[Hersh67]

The problem is that most (pretty much *all*) mechs tend to have much weaker armor in the rear.  An Atlas can shrug off a Spider in it's rear arc for a while, but most mechs under 75-80 tons just won't last long with something like that behind them.   You can't afford to ignore the 'nuisance' behind you for very long as it will kill you just as dead. 

Having an enemy get behind you happens at times.  It's not that you've been an idiot (although that can be possible), but it can also be that your opponent just did their job very well. If the fight is big enough those smaller mech will get into someone's rear and then they can make a huge difference.  Once behind you the question become 'what do you do about it?'.

[Diablo48]

The problem is that most (pretty much *all*) mechs tend to have much weaker armor in the rear.  An Atlas can shrug off a Spider in it's rear arc for a while, but most mechs under 75-80 tons just won't last long with something like that behind them.   You can't afford to ignore the 'nuisance' behind you for very long as it will kill you just as dead. 

Having an enemy get behind you happens at times.  It's not that you've been an idiot (although that can be possible), but it can also be that your opponent just did their job very well. If the fight is big enough those smaller mech will get into someone's rear and then they can make a huge difference.  Once behind you the question become 'what do you do about it?'.

Yes, my point was you do not have to be an idiot because you have flippable arms.  What it does is give you the option to unleash the bulk of your arsenal on that backstabber if you want to so when something nasty like a Fire Moth H finds its way back there you can kill it in one go.

[Hellraiser]

The problem is both of these arguments also apply to the lower arm actuators as well.

Uhm, no, a WarHammer w/o Lowers would look like a Rifleman,  not the same thing.
Sometimes you just like that Elbo Joint w/ Guns look  ;)

[Hellraiser]

Better yet, four arms!  Hold with two, beat on face with two, just like Goro/Kintaro! 

LMAO.......so simple.......and brings back imagery of PURE AWESOME  O0

[Diablo48]

Uhm, no, a WarHammer w/o Lowers would look like a Rifleman,  not the same thing.
Sometimes you just like that Elbo Joint w/ Guns look  ;)

Sort of like the arms on the Timber Wolf?  Honestly, there is really no consistent visual distinction between the two so you can stat it either way so long as there are no hands.

[deathfrombeyond]

For the purposes of custom designing 'Mechs, I can't think of a good reason to have lower arm actuators WITHOUT hands...but I suppose you could ask a similar question about a lot of other equipment when custom designing 'Mechs.

For example, why put a C3 slave in a 'Mech designed specifically for one on one duels? Why put CASE in a location that has no explosive components? Etc., etc.

[Ryumyo]

Retractable blade. Now imagine this on a handless design, Warhammer or Marauder comes to mind.

[Youngblood]

Retractable blade. Now imagine this on a handless design, Warhammer or Marauder comes to mind.

+1 to you, sir, though I'd rather put it on something with the speed to use it, like the missile arm on the Trebuchet.  Pelt from afar with the LRMs, stabbity goodness at range zero! (EDIT: After taking that hand off of it, of course.)

Pardon my memory, but does the BattleMech Lance weapon require Hand Actuators?  If it doesn't, and you needed to pad out the rest of the crits in that arm....

[Orin J.]

flipping your weapons to your rear arc might mean the backstabber has done it's job by pointing those guns away from the main force, it's much better to swing an arm around and leave them as a secondary target, now that i think about it. nothing wrong with dividing fire if it means less fire divided away from your primary target after all!

An Atlas can shrug off a Spider in it's rear arc for a while-

Dat Atlas also usually has just as much firepower as the Spider in its rear arc. not the best example for why you want to work with arm flipping...

[Legion]

For the purposes of custom designing 'Mechs, I can't think of a good reason to have lower arm actuators WITHOUT hands...but I suppose you could ask a similar question about a lot of other equipment when custom designing 'Mechs.

For example, why put a C3 slave in a 'Mech designed specifically for one on one duels? Why put CASE in a location that has no explosive components? Etc., etc.

However, all those "unique situation" items are useful in the situation they are designed for, where having lower arm actuators without hands doesn't seem to have a special situation where it is actually useful.

[mutantmagnet]

This is very situational. If you are carrying BA wit an omni you will want weapons in your hands because you can't fire anything from the torso till they dismount. While being limited to mounting weapons n your arms you can end up being forced to not use hand actuators. You don't want to remove the lower arm actuator in at least on one arm because if you are in a situation where you would want to split your firepower between a backstabber and the frontman you can't do so if all lower arm actuators are removed.

[Diablo48]

This is very situational. If you are carrying BA wit an omni you will want weapons in your hands because you can't fire anything from the torso till they dismount. While being limited to mounting weapons n your arms you can end up being forced to not use hand actuators. You don't want to remove the lower arm actuator in at least on one arm because if you are in a situation where you would want to split your firepower between a backstabber and the frontman you can't do so if all lower arm actuators are removed.

Actually, arm flipping requires both Lower Arm Actuators to be removed, and omnis are a special case anyways because many weapons force you to strip out the Actuators even if you would have room for them.

[deathfrombeyond]

However, all those "unique situation" items are useful in the situation they are designed for, where having lower arm actuators without hands doesn't seem to have a special situation where it is actually useful.

Sure there is, it just isn't encountered very often.

Suppose you are playing in a game balanced by C-Bills, and suppose opponents custom design 'Mechs for their opposition.

There wouldn't really be a good reason NOT to put in lower arm actuators whenever possible, considering that they cost C-Bills and can't contribute any sort of meaningful combat advantage.

[mutantmagnet]

Actually, arm flipping requires both Lower Arm Actuators to be removed, and omnis are a special case anyways because many weapons force you to strip out the Actuators even if you would have room for them.

That's what I'm saying. You want to keep one arm with a lower arm actuator so you can split your fire in that rare situation you woul want to do that.

[Diablo48]

That's what I'm saying. You want to keep one arm with a lower arm actuator so you can split your fire in that rare situation you woul want to do that.

Not possible.  If you keep one of the Lower Arm Actuators you prevent both arms from flipping.