Opinions on BV balance and Aerospace in Ground Support.

[Lance Leader]

  I've been playing around with the idea of using aerospace in a ground support role in Battletech games but I'm on the fence on if they are overpowered or not under the current ruleset in Total Warfare.  On the one hand in MegaMek test runs, even with a full bomb load, they tend to win about 50/50 in slugging matches with equivalent BV mechs.  Threshold crits and lawn-dart roles tend to balance out against their to-hit advantage and high armor values, but in an actual game their ability to dictate the fight with their huge mobility advantage and the fact that mechs with short range weapons have such awful to-hit numbers against them kind makes them a bit a too strong for their BV unless someone has a ground force tailored to beat them.  As well the fact that in actual Battletech as opposed to MegaMek half your bomb load goes into the rear facing also makes bomb runs too lethal by my estimation against any opponent without an aerospace screen.

  My question is for those that have used aerospace in a ground support support role is how powerful have you found them to be?  As well how have you integrated them into your games (mixed land air BV with a low altitude map, Battlefield Support rules, Radar map, etc.)?

[DevianID]

So when I have played mixed aero vs ground, since its asymmetric right off the bat its easy to 'break' the game.  Taking cheap planes like the very solid boeing jump bomber, and loading up HE bombs, means you have a very effective answer to small units, the classic example being the dasher.  Because of how planes interact with initiative and range, it is impossible for a mech force to shoot down a bomber before it has dive bombed a target, so the jump bomber is guaranteed to deliver its 40 damage to a dasher's hex no matter what the ground game does, and even if the Plane player loses init, because mechs all move before planes there is no way for a dasher to prevent being hit by a bomber.  Further, in base games of total warfare (ie no tac ops), bombs are the only source of AE damage, so they nuke infantry really well.  Now, infantry is mathematically the most broken thing in BV, so anything that makes infantry cry is a good thing, but bombs ignoring TMM just removes the light mechs relying on evasion too easily.  Its like introducing a new invasive species to eradicate a different problematic invasive species... all you accomplish is having 2 invasive species now.

Now, you can try and counter this with 10 thrust interceptors and the radar map, but that is disproportionate BV spent countering the bomber and you are not guaranteed to be able to intercept.

Anyway, to the main point, because air power is so asymmetric, just like the other asymmetric game options they are never balanced.  They are either too good, or underwhelming.  A ground forces versus a mixed ground and air force often ends up on the 'too good' side with bombs, as you can nuke any problematic ground units the ground only side has on the very first turn with no counter play, meaning you start the damage trading with a massive head start--and because of splash damage the enemy cant clump up to provide effective AA counter fire without being punished by AE scatter.  Without bombs, air power has to roll to hit like normal, so a balanced ground lance with a mix of range and speed can force lawn dart checks and move in a clump so all ground units are in range to shoot back at attacking flyers at range 9.  In that case, 2 heavy fighters both taking damage will see one crash about half the time they fail a PSR, as you are at elevation 4 after attacking and lose 4+ elevations 50% of the time on a d6 failed PSR roll.  So often after 2-3 attack runs max a flyer has crashed, greatly limiting their overall impact.

[DevianID]

If you want to bring air power in a BV balanced way, I recommend not using bombs and using the middleweight or light fighters.  In total warfare/tech manual, everything in the BV formula is based on movement TMM for defensive TMM and attacker movement for offensive multipliers.  Bombs hit anywhere on the board, so their offensive reach is whatever range your board is, but their offensive movement modifier in BV they pay for is like 6/9 or whatever speed the plane goes at (so they dont pay for the ability to move and attack anywhere on the ground map due to scale differences with the low altitude air versus air map).  Further, the target's TMM, which the target pays for with BV, is ignored with bombs, which causes that asymmetric imbalance I mentioned above.

So something like a transit/corsair without bombs tends to be pretty balanced compared to the same unit but with 100 AE bomb damage on top.  The weapons have to roll to hit versus a targets TMM, so it follows the formula everything else uses on the ground map at least a little bit.  Further, the planes arnt too expensive so a bad PSR doesnt wreck an assault mechs worth of BV with a single roll on something like a Stuka, but they arnt too cheap that you have swarms of them.  Because air always uses short range, its important like any unit in battletech not to spam, so like dont take 6 mech busters for 2500 BV in a 6k BV game kinda like dont take 12 savannah masters for the same 2.5k BV.

[Weirdo]

So long as you don't go full cheese with ultracheap bombers, just straight BV works just fine. Bigger birds can be expensive, but that cost accurately reflects the sheer power of an intelligently flown heavy fighter.

[Cannonshop]

  I've been playing around with the idea of using aerospace in a ground support role in Battletech games but I'm on the fence on if they are overpowered or not under the current ruleset in Total Warfare.  On the one hand in MegaMek test runs, even with a full bomb load, they tend to win about 50/50 in slugging matches with equivalent BV mechs.  Threshold crits and lawn-dart roles tend to balance out against their to-hit advantage and high armor values, but in an actual game their ability to dictate the fight with their huge mobility advantage and the fact that mechs with short range weapons have such awful to-hit numbers against them kind makes them a bit a too strong for their BV unless someone has a ground force tailored to beat them.  As well the fact that in actual Battletech as opposed to MegaMek half your bomb load goes into the rear facing also makes bomb runs too lethal by my estimation against any opponent without an aerospace screen.

  My question is for those that have used aerospace in a ground support support role is how powerful have you found them to be?  As well how have you integrated them into your games (mixed land air BV with a low altitude map, Battlefield Support rules, Radar map, etc.)?

DevianID outlined the basics pretty solidly, bombers are more useful than strikers or strafers with regards to airpower, and once it's introduced with bombers, you need something specifically to shoot them down-at least, until the bombs are expended.

I think he missed a couple of things though-for one, timing.  even with ASF forces in play, it's somewhat difficult to have them lined up in a useful way on the ground map, you have to be thinking ahead a lot, or your fighter-bomber will be making their pass somewhere it's completely useless for anything except noting where targets are in a hidden units type scenario (and not always then).

Second is that your flight path may find itself crossing something that has bonus to hit on flying targets (such as: LBX, Flak rounds, or artillery in ADA mode).  Lawn dart checks are not JUST for successful bombing runs, and even a heavy fighter can find itself crashing if the dice aren't kind-sometimes without being positioned to do much of anything at all.

So using aero takes a lot more forethought than 'mechs or tanks (*or even VTOLs)

This includes 'reading' your opponent's intentions or 'leading' them, depending on your tactical style, and more than one turn ahead.  In a sense this is like properly employing non-guided artillery-the bombs, like the shells, may be quite powerful, but that doesn't do you a spit of good if you can't line up the strike to hit somewhere that power is useful.

 

[DevianID]

To cannonshop, the issue of not being able to reach a target with air is largely a problem when stacking optional rules, right?  Normally you just draw a line anywhere you please when you move over the ground map.  But if you play with air on ground maps with turn modes and velocity tracking on a small ground map, well then you can 'mispilot' the fighter trying to stay inside a small box as 16 hexes, the slowest you can go, is often too fast and sees you fly off the map or unable to line up a shot, but that feels like a gameplay mismatch by using optional rules when they arnt called for.  Anyway, longwinded point is that anyone actually comfortable with how the air rules work will always be able to hit their target since they move after mechs and can choose their flight line accordingly.

As for ground intercepts, again being able to shoot the bomber isn't a problem I have seen, as all damage is simultaneous.  So even if you fly over 20 LB10x AA guns you still drop your bombs even if the AA explodes you.

Tl;dr, I have the exact opposite experience to you, when you say aero requires reading and leading and such.  Instead for me it's super brain dead as aero always gets there guaranteed anywhere on the board in base rules, and always gets to attack with bombs no matter how much flak is in your list.

[Lance Leader]

If you want to bring air power in a BV balanced way, I recommend not using bombs and using the middleweight or light fighters.  In total warfare/tech manual, everything in the BV formula is based on movement TMM for defensive TMM and attacker movement for offensive multipliers.  Bombs hit anywhere on the board, so their offensive reach is whatever range your board is, but their offensive movement modifier in BV they pay for is like 6/9 or whatever speed the plane goes at (so they dont pay for the ability to move and attack anywhere on the ground map due to scale differences with the low altitude air versus air map).  Further, the target's TMM, which the target pays for with BV, is ignored with bombs, which causes that asymmetric imbalance I mentioned above.

So something like a transit/corsair without bombs tends to be pretty balanced compared to the same unit but with 100 AE bomb damage on top.  The weapons have to roll to hit versus a targets TMM, so it follows the formula everything else uses on the ground map at least a little bit.  Further, the planes arnt too expensive so a bad PSR doesnt wreck an assault mechs worth of BV with a single roll on something like a Stuka, but they arnt too cheap that you have swarms of them.  Because air always uses short range, its important like any unit in battletech not to spam, so like dont take 6 mech busters for 2500 BV in a 6k BV game kinda like dont take 12 savannah masters for the same 2.5k BV.

  Excellent advice.  In addition to not bringing bombs using lighter fighters with their thinner armor and vulnerability to through armor critical damage really shows off the vulnerability of aerospace.  Something like an Eisensturm can feel like an unstoppable monster if your opponent doesn't have the high penetrating weapons to make those threshold crits.  Sure it's still 2700+ BV that can fall out of the sky at any moment when the paint gets scratched but it's less obvious to the opponent than something like Lucifer or a Sparrowhawk falling apart turn by turn from critical damage.

[Cannonshop]

To cannonshop, the issue of not being able to reach a target with air is largely a problem when stacking optional rules, right?  Normally you just draw a line anywhere you please when you move over the ground map.  But if you play with air on ground maps with turn modes and velocity tracking on a small ground map, well then you can 'mispilot' the fighter trying to stay inside a small box as 16 hexes, the slowest you can go, is often too fast and sees you fly off the map or unable to line up a shot, but that feels like a gameplay mismatch by using optional rules when they arnt called for.  Anyway, longwinded point is that anyone actually comfortable with how the air rules work will always be able to hit their target since they move after mechs and can choose their flight line accordingly.

As for ground intercepts, again being able to shoot the bomber isn't a problem I have seen, as all damage is simultaneous.  So even if you fly over 20 LB10x AA guns you still drop your bombs even if the AA explodes you.

Tl;dr, I have the exact opposite experience to you, when you say aero requires reading and leading and such.  Instead for me it's super brain dead as aero always gets there guaranteed anywhere on the board in base rules, and always gets to attack with bombs no matter how much flak is in your list.

Fascinating, are you sure you're reading the rules right, and are you sticking to the 10 second turn, or using a longer period? There's a basic scaling difference involved here, when you're mixing ground with aerospace, then again, i'ts been a while since I've done it outside of megamek, and in that program, depending on map size, it's between tow and three turns between passes as your movement tends to end off the edge of the map on anything smaller than 5x9.

also, are you maintaining awareness of how many bombs you can drop per airframe per turn?  IIRC there ARE limits.

I could be wrong, of course, it's been a while since I could play it live.

[DevianID]

So the base low altitude map is different then the optional air-on-ground map that megamek uses.  In megamek the air units have turn modes and such, but with base rules you fly over the ground mapsheet and pick your angle and line.  Its easier and way less fiddly then the optional system megamek uses.

Edit: ive used air-on-ground mapsheets for megamek too, and on a large enough board where the action happens in the middle, it works out the same as the low altitude map, just with a bit more micromanaging.  But yeah in megamek needing to move discreet blocks of 16 hexes while also needing to stay on the board to execute your attack does make a very gamey air game.  Especially on maps like 24 across that 16 hexes doesn't reach the enemy DZ but 32 doesnt fit on the board.

[Weirdo]

also, are you maintaining awareness of how many bombs you can drop per airframe per turn?  IIRC there ARE limits.

If you're dropping books from a StratOps internal bomb bay quirk, it's 6 bombs per turn.

If you're dropping normally in a level bombing attack it's 2 per hex for a total of 10.

If you're bombing normally in a dive bombing attack it's quite literally Go Nuts.

[Daryk]

The "Go Nuts" approach is a thing of beauty on the tabletop... >:D