LX-2* Lancer - 50t, TRO3067
Originally posted 05 Oct. 2005. All proposed fan-variants should be posted in the corresponding “FotW Workshop†thread. Meant to supplement the formidable but overworked
Stingray in the dogfighting role, the LX-2
Lancer is more-or-less sufficiently armed for the job, and certainly mobile enough... but it’s sharply limited in the amount of punishment it can absorb, meaning that said mobility may be its only real edge.
The original LX-1 was a testbed for advanced aviation technologies, particularly avionic and weapons systems. Developed therefrom, the LX-2 first flew in March of ’60 but spent several more years in development before the first squadrons reached Initial Operation Capability (IOC) in 3064... suggesting that excessive political oversight of the military procurement process is one of many problems that humanity will
not overcome in the next millenium or so. ::) As has too often been the case where domestic politics have interfered in BattleTech development, the craft which emerged seems to be a compromise... and as any negotiator will tell you, a compromise is simply a proposal that leaves all of the parties involved equally unhappy. :'(
Using a 250SFE and five tons of ‘diatomic hydrogen’ (???) fuel to achieve a 7/11 thrust curve, the
Lancer is fairly high-performance; for instance, it can out-turn its ‘big brother’ the
Stingray without much difficulty, and it can keep up with contemporaries like the FedSuns’ formidable fast-dogfighter/attacker the
Dagger. Its armament is enough for the dogfighting role: a large pulse laser in each wing, with an Artemis’d LRM-10 in the nose with a single ton of ammo; while the type mounts only the base ten DHS, that’s enough dissipation capacity to fire any two of your three weapons - about all that you need in a dogfighter, which is unlikely to get centreline targets too often. That said, I can’t say any of the weapons would be my first choices; while the LPL’s -2 TH bonus is certainly useful, the things only barely reach Medium range and they’re too heavy for their throw-weight; the LRM-10 with Artemis offers a decent-enough 8-point thwack at Long range, but again doesn’t really impress. :-\ (The TW-era cluster-weapons change made it even less impressive against heavily-armoured targets... though the two clusters mean it could still bully lightfighters with multiple TAC checks.)
Where the type really fails the ‘good enough’ test, however, is in its lacklustre protection: a mere 8.5 tons of standard(!) armour laminates, 38/33/32, simply
is not tough enough for the modern combat zone - hell, it was insufficient back in the pre-foundtech era! The universal metrestick is the standard IS medium laser, and when said metrestick can force a threshold crit-check on a fifty-tonner’s
nose, you
know that its armour is piss-poor. >:( I haven’t used Leaguer designs of
anything too much, but their seeming doctrine - namely “win the fight fast enough with your guns and you won’t
need armour!†- is a dog that just don’t hunt. How the hell such a mentality can develop in the CBT universe, where ablative armour rules all, simply staggers belief... unless the FWL’s lack of any significant combat experience since Operation: GUERRERO has led to their designers losing touch with (operational) reality, which is not outside the realm of possibility. :( (Remember how the first four production series of F-4 Phantom were armed only with external ordnance “because the gun was obsolete as a weapon of aerial combat� >:().
Frankly, I’d rather
not deploy the
Lancer in its current state - “Speed is Life!†only goes so far in AT2/R, and if a
Lancer tries to stand-and-deliver on its own, it
WILL die. However, if you find yourself obliged to throw
Lancers into the meatgrinder, the best idea would be to make maximum use of ‘slashing’ tactics while an accompanying unit of F-92
Stingrays provides both Long-range fire-support and the necessary ‘toe-to-toe’ slugging power.
Remember your mantras, and
never stop moving! Remember, he who flies straight and level in the combat zone for more than thirty seconds at a stretch signs his own death warrant.
Taking on
Lancers? Good mobility is necessary, yes, and thick armour would help, but I’d say that 6/9 movement might actually be sufficient for the task; what you really need are some hard-hitting weapons with Medium range or better - Long would be greatly preferred, since the goal is not so much to beat the
Lancer in the dogfight as to hammer it into inefficacy
without trying to turn with it. I would recommend the Capellan TR-13A
Transgressor without hesitation: its triple ERLLs give it three times the Long-range hitting-power than the
Lancer, and by using ‘boom and zoom’ tactics (preferably with two or more points flying in trail) you can maul the LX-2s from beyond their own optimum engagement range. Similarly, the ninety-five-ton gorilla that is the EST-
Eisensturm makes
Lancers cringe in fear - those twin Gausses that the -R3/Prime packs are almost enough to OSK the League machine, and the spaceframe itself is all but immune to return fire! :o - but again, hit ’em hard then blow through before they can turn after you. The order of the day is “Kick their ass - don’t piss on ’em!†;D
And before anyone asks? Putting a DARO-1
Dagger up against an LX-2
Lancer is one of the grossest mis-matches I can imagine, especially in the
Dagger Prime loadout. Unless the Leaguer gets in some lucky crits and hobbles the FedSuns machine from the outset, the
Dagger’s far-superior armour profile and its
big-ass Medium-range chainsaw (formally known as a RAC/5 ;D) will utterly dismember the heavier spaceframe and celebrate with a “Hail to the King, baby!†;D
The sole production variant of the LX-2 is the imaginatively-named LX-2A, which apparently serves primarily aboard the
Thera-class CA(V) FWLS
Santorini. Offloading the LRM-10 and its attachments for an ERLL, a DHS and a ton of fuel, this model gains better combat-endurance in fuel and ammo terms and loses nothing in heat efficiency (you can still fire any two of your weapons without deficit), but does nothing to redress the type’s grevious vulnerability. Arguably superior to the baseline model, but still not a platform I’d operate if I had anything remotely resembling a better option. :(
[VARIANT PROPOSAL(S) REDACTED] All proposed fan-variants - including my own - belong in the corresponding “FotW Workshop†thread: http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,3492.0.html Be advised: the attached .txt transcript(s) of previous runs of this thread contain numerous reader-proposals for variants. I’ll try to change those out for ‘sanitised’ versions of those threads when I can, but I can’t promise it’ll be soon - that’s a lot of ground to cover. ;)
