Recoiless Rifles on Battlemechs/Heavy Vees

[Psyckosama]

Do you think if should be made possible in the rules?

[beachhead1985]

deffinately, if RRs were any good according to the rules.

I would love a real Ontos 8)

[greatsarcasmo]

I would love light support vees with RRs.

[Psyckosama]

deffinately, if RRs were any good according to the rules.

I would love a real Ontos 8)

We have rules for them, remember?

1-3, 4-5, 6-7 3 damage. Probably 1-2 tons 12ish rounds a ton.

[beachhead1985]

We have rules for them, remember?

1-3, 4-5, 6-7 3 damage. Probably 1-2 tons 12ish rounds a ton.

oh trust me I am painfully aware of the currently available rules for recoilless rifles, i keep trying to make effective BA mounting them.

[Psyckosama]

oh trust me I am painfully aware of the currently available rules for recoilless rifles, i keep trying to make effective BA mounting them.

I don't think they're that bad. A bit heavy but they have reasonable range, damage, and aren't limited in their ammo.

[greatsarcasmo]

Where are the rules? TM or TO?

[Stormfury]

Tech Manual, and they've had errata to make them lighter.

[mutantmagnet]

Do you think if should be made possible in the rules?

I've always assumed that's what autocannons were considering their bizarre ranges relative to cannon size.

[Korzon77]

Also, not everything is equal under teh rules-- remember that recoiless rifles were invented in the 1940's-- and are easy to make. They're not the best weapon, but they're the kind of thing you put on a suit that will keep working even after the fancy lasers have packed it in for lack of spares.

[Onisuzume]

Also, not everything is equal under teh rules-- remember that recoiless rifles were invented in the 1940's-- and are easy to make. They're not the best weapon, but they're the kind of thing you put on a suit that will keep working even after the fancy lasers have packed it in for lack of spares.

If you call 1910 the 1940s, then indeed it is.
Which would be the Davis Gun.
The gun itself stopped after the Great War, but the idea hadn't.
After the Great War, the Russians decided to have a go at it (various models between 37mm and 305mm calibres), beginning in 1923.

[ProtoEva00]

  Things to consider.  RL Recoilless rifles are single shot weapons, requiring manual re-loading.  I can see BA doing this, but on a vee or BM, this could turn the weapon into a OS.  The real Onos had to be re-loaded from outside the vehicle.

[Sabelkatten]

oh trust me I am painfully aware of the currently available rules for recoilless rifles, i keep trying to make effective BA mounting them.

IMHO the MRR is one of the best BA weapons in the IS unless you can get a MagShot. No ammo worries, decent damage, decent range, and all in just 250 kgs of fun! :)

[Nebfer]

One thing I think would improve BA RRs if they could use the different ammo types available to them in the RPG (missiles are another item where these could be useful).

Like Anti-personnel, Anti-vehicle, Flare, Flash, Gas, HE, Inferno, Smoke and Stun
Medium and heavy could also use FASCAM rounds.

Anti-personnel = -1 damage for an extra D6 of infantry damage
Anti-vehicle = Removes the anti-personel attack for a +1 or +2 anti-armor attack
Flare = illuminates a hex and it's ring around it at night for 1D6 turns
Flash = not sure what to do (most vehicles are resistant to this type of round and infantry all have protective measures -might be useful on civis...).
Gas = nuff said
HE = Unknown (perhaps it being regular ammo?)
Inferno = each hit counts for half an inferno round (round down)
Smoke = places a light smoke hex in the target area for 1D3 turns
Stun = Like Flash I do not know what to do with this one
FASCAM = Places a minefield in the targeted hex with the base damage of the weapons regular attack (i.e. 2 or 3 damage).

[XaosGorilla]

    lemme see, would i like a weapon with the same anti infantry and anti mech capability at twice the range, without the 200 point explosion that a 1/2 ton of mg ammo represents?   

    Yes please! lol

[LastChanceCav]

If the clans have the APGR, why shouldn't the IS have their own version? Maybe go with the MRR's (3 damage 2/4/6 range) and mass it as 0.5 tons with 20 shots/ton?

Cheers,
LCC

[FedComGirl]

I would like it to be possible. There were old rules for allowing support infantry weapons to be mounted on vehicles in Combat Equipment. I never worked out how many shots per ton of ammo most of them would have though.

[Psyckosama]

I would like it to be possible. There were old rules for allowing support infantry weapons to be mounted on vehicles in Combat Equipment. I never worked out how many shots per ton of ammo most of them would have though.

Really...  :)

[FedComGirl]

Yep :)   

The new rules are in TechManual and restrict them to vehicles under 5 tons. They're also very weak in terms of damage done and have the same ranges as they do for infantry

Combat Equipment allowed them be mounted on larger vehicles but their weight increased to .5 ton. You'd need a slot for the weapon and one for the ammo and 1 heat sink per energy weapon. They're was also a chart showing what support weapons would equal what vehicular weapons. Like a support autocannon equaling a heavy machine gun. Damage was as for the vehicle/mech/battlearmor versions. Heavy Recoiless Rifles doing 3 points of damage vs 0 points for the infantry scale ones as listed in TechManual.

[Psyckosama]

Yep :)   

The new rules are in TechManual and restrict them to vehicles under 5 tons. They're also very weak in terms of damage done and have the same ranges as they do for infantry

Combat Equipment allowed them be mounted on larger vehicles but their weight increased to .5 ton. You'd need a slot for the weapon and one for the ammo and 1 heat sink per energy weapon. They're was also a chart showing what support weapons would equal what vehicular weapons. Like a support autocannon equaling a heavy machine gun. Damage was as for the vehicle/mech/battlearmor versions. Heavy Recoiless Rifles doing 3 points of damage vs 0 points for the infantry scale ones as listed in TechManual.

What page?

Sounds much better than the schlock in TW.

[FedComGirl]

Page 110 in Combat Equipment.

The original TRO 3026 also had support weapons automatically doing damage to combat units. Of course others didn't but there was a table that said at what rolls they could damage them.

I really hope they work on the rules for support weapons because they're really screwy.

[Psyckosama]

Page 110 in Combat Equipment.

The original TRO 3026 also had support weapons automatically doing damage to combat units. Of course others didn't but there was a table that said at what rolls they could damage them.

I really hope they work on the rules for support weapons because they're really screwy.

So do I. Personally if I had to do infantry over again, I'd break them up into squads instead of platoons and roll to hit and damage with support weapons separately from rifles

[FedComGirl]

So do I. Personally if I had to do infantry over again, I'd break them up into squads instead of platoons and roll to hit and damage with support weapons separately from rifles

I'd definitely separate support weapons and secondary weapons from the primary ones. I'd also try to be more consistent with damages and ammo weights.

[truetanker]

I roll the Infantry in Squads and their usage of Field Guns the same, the can make 2 attacks each turn, but I add a house rule of +1 if they do.

My people think that is fair.

Anyone have a similar ruling?

I haven't used the newer RR yet, but I have used them in the old MW games.

TT