What makes a Mech a boat?

[CloaknDagger]

Honestly, the best way to combat boating is to hit the boat with its weakness.  After all, if you run into someone who like boating Medium Lasers of some form you can throw a flock of Donnars at them and laugh.  They will never catch the choppers while they get cut to pieces by the ERLLs.  Similarly if they like Hellstars for masses of ERPPCs, you can respond with a pile of conventional infantry and laugh as the big guy flails at them ineffectively.

And if they're in a pair?

Say, a Hellstar along with a Nova?

[HazMeat]

I guess boating might result in a game-breaking imbalance if you do a 1-on-1 duel where one unit may have a decisive mobility advantage, but I fail to see how that's any more or less a problem of cheesing a weapon focus than cheesing a mobility investment.  It's all just rule of cool, I guess, and for me that favours a variety of boaty and brackety, fast and slow, 'mech and tank, vanilla and chocolate, etc. though I'm developing increasingly specific preferences for what constitutes a "sexy" battlemech. 

For 'mechs I prefer mixing weapon types, mostly because I'm most comfortable with bracket fire setups but also because I'm a bit intimidated by the prospect of big games with lots to lose track of over the long time I'd expect one grand battle to take, so dedicating whole 'mechs to single weapon types like really large forces do would for me mean putting all of one type of egg in just one or two baskets- not that I think it's inferior competitively, it's just personal taste so far as I can tell. 

I like the idea of pairing a Nova with a Hellstar, given the iconic pairing of the HBK-4P with the AWS-8Q, though I kinda think the Crab is a closer analogue for the Nova.  According to sarna.net the Nova is declining in numbers by the time the Hellstar hits, which I find uncanny unless there's a replacement design I should know about...

[Diablo48]

And if they're in a pair?

Say, a Hellstar along with a Nova?

Unless they invested in a high end pilot for the Hellstar the Donnars will work against both (you will just take some casualties to the ERPPCs), and if they do that then you can throw an unholy number of cheap infantry at them because the Nova is not much better against them than the Hellstar.

I guess boating might result in a game-breaking imbalance if you do a 1-on-1 duel where one unit may have a decisive mobility advantage, but I fail to see how that's any more or less a problem of cheesing a weapon focus than cheesing a mobility investment.  It's all just rule of cool, I guess, and for me that favours a variety of boaty and brackety, fast and slow, 'mech and tank, vanilla and chocolate, etc. though I'm developing increasingly specific preferences for what constitutes a "sexy" battlemech. 

For 'mechs I prefer mixing weapon types, mostly because I'm most comfortable with bracket fire setups but also because I'm a bit intimidated by the prospect of big games with lots to lose track of over the long time I'd expect one grand battle to take, so dedicating whole 'mechs to single weapon types like really large forces do would for me mean putting all of one type of egg in just one or two baskets- not that I think it's inferior competitively, it's just personal taste so far as I can tell.

Mixing weapon types on a single frame and investing in bracket setups is generally superior.  Mixing weapon types makes your force more resilient because you do not loose the ability to deal with certain threats when you loose a single specialist.  Using brackets mean your 'Mechs will all be hitting at about 75% of what a specialist does at either range which gives you an overall edge over a mixture of specialists which will have to leave entire 'Mechs out of the fight (adding some specialists to a bracketing body can give an advantage though).

I like the idea of pairing a Nova with a Hellstar, given the iconic pairing of the HBK-4P with the AWS-8Q, though I kinda think the Crab is a closer analogue for the Nova.  According to sarna.net the Nova is declining in numbers by the time the Hellstar hits, which I find uncanny unless there's a replacement design I should know about...

The Nova was never very common, even in the initial invasion.  It went out of production well before 3050 and has been declining ever since.  As for replacements, you can generally do anything it can on other omnis if you really want to with the Stormcrow and Summoner being the best candidates, or if you are just interested in a canon ERML spam design you can pick up a Sphinx.

[HazMeat]

Nah, it's mostly just nostalgia for the Nova's wonderfully odd, low-slung shape and handful of straitforward canon pod loads.  I'm not even fond of the Clan ERML really, I'm more drawn to clan uber-pulse weaponry.  If I were to choose clan stuf for _me_ to use, I'd reach for the Marauder IIC as a "clan Awesome."  Sure, a Hellstar would have the advantage in a duel, but even if that's what the scenario is I'd rather have fun losing with something I have a crazy nostalgic fondness for than go through the motions of grinding Hellstars with some one and making us both feel a bit diritier just for the sake of some contrived social pressures. 

I'm tactically handicapped, to put it in terms Censortron won't likely make look worse than they are, so I'm assuming it's more likely that I'm failing to see why peops can't just discourage boaters by showing them how a real 'mech is built than that peops with access to this forum simply can't grasp the concept of sharing heat sinks to get more out of them.  There's probably a reason we see weeping and gnashing of teeth over "lame" or "cheesy" boat setups.  TBH I'm not sure it's not simply ignorance, but how long can the half-life really be for some one in the play group noticing that those awesome PPC and lasers are all more than half heat sink by weight and that those PPC start to lose effectiveness just as the ML comes into optimum range? 

I can see that bracket setups are naively much more efficient than specialists, your 3/4 figure seeming about right, but I doubt it's worth an awful lot more or less than being able to have most of weapon X exactly where it's most useful, most of weapon Y where it's most useful, etc. if you've got a half-decent mind for wargaming and/or your opponent is a derpnugget like myself.  There's some things to be said about eggs and baskets, and I agree with you there.  I am much more comfortable with commander-style sturdy JOATs and "whatever, I can do it that way too" anchors than sharper but more brittle tools.  However, those dedicated CQB specialists and bombardment machines and such all trying to Knight's Fork my dumb ass can be more threatening if they are properly deployed. 

Maybe we should ask Shin Ji and Slayer why boating seems to need active discouragement in their group rather than speculating wildly on possible counters based on hypothetical situations that may or may not be relevant at all, like having room and time to pick things apart with a Donar or even having non-'mech assets allowed at all or whatever else that others and I might have alluded to. 

[Shin Ji]

Maybe we should ask Shin Ji and Slayer why boating seems to need active discouragement in their group rather than speculating wildly on possible counters based on hypothetical situations that may or may not be relevant at all, like having room and time to pick things apart with a Donar or even having non-'mech assets allowed at all or whatever else that others and I might have alluded to. 

Heh.  My group is myself, generally.  I sometimes play with other people over Megamek (hi MekSlayer!), but mostly I play the Against-The -Bot campaign.  When I asked the question, I figured it was a solved problem, so to speak, and someone would have a formula of some kind handy.  Imagine my surprise when this thread blew up the way it did!

I'm beginning to understand the benefits of having bracket fire available, at least in the 3025 era with single heat sinks for non-light mechs.  They have more tonnage than heat to spare.  But once you get into double heat sinks, and particularly with Clan weaponry, it's hard to justify not piling on the Medium Pulse Lasers.  The IS versions are largely useless (I read that thread), but the Clan ones are so good that once you have a few long range weapons available, why use anything else?

[McSlayer]

Heh.  My group is myself, generally.  I sometimes play with other people over Megamek (hi MekSlayer!), but mostly I play the Against-The -Bot campaign.  When I asked the question, I figured it was a solved problem, so to speak, and someone would have a formula of some kind handy.  Imagine my surprise when this thread blew up the way it did!

I'm beginning to understand the benefits of having bracket fire available, at least in the 3025 era with single heat sinks for non-light mechs.  They have more tonnage than heat to spare.  But once you get into double heat sinks, and particularly with Clan weaponry, it's hard to justify not piling on the Medium Pulse Lasers.  The IS versions are largely useless (I read that thread), but the Clan ones are so good that once you have a few long range weapons available, why use anything else?

Have to agree with you that Clan LPL and Clan MPL's are too good and too powerful... Even on the Wars of Reaving Mekwars Server they had to limit the number of LPL used in forces to keep game balance. Which goes to show that there is a need to make games fun and playable, but still allow ppl to customize their mechs, look at MWO. They couldn't stop the mechlab from happening. As for IS MPL's there is a huge advantage in them, as Jumping IS MPL boats have  low BV, so they are very effective in mass combat.

So what rules can each of you formulate that would keep every satisfied from preventing the cheesy munchkin designs, such as Clan ERPPCs on light mechs, Gaussilla's,  Hellstar's, etc...???

I think with rules set to limit all custom and canon mech designs to a maximum of 1 weapon  of any specific type, then all players might agree that any mech made under this rule would not be considered a boat / munchkin. Do you agree or disagree and why?

Is it because of Dual HGR's? Dual HAG40's? Even Dual AC20's?

[Shin Ji]

I think with rules set to limit all custom and canon mech designs to a maximum of 1 weapon  of any specific type, then all players might agree that any mech made under this rule would not be considered a boat / munchkin. Do you agree or disagree and why?

Because that's not how Battletech works?  Seriously.  Less than 10% of published Mechs fit under that rule.

[Diablo48]

Nah, it's mostly just nostalgia for the Nova's wonderfully odd, low-slung shape and handful of straitforward canon pod loads.  I'm not even fond of the Clan ERML really, I'm more drawn to clan uber-pulse weaponry.  If I were to choose clan stuf for _me_ to use, I'd reach for the Marauder IIC as a "clan Awesome."  Sure, a Hellstar would have the advantage in a duel, but even if that's what the scenario is I'd rather have fun losing with something I have a crazy nostalgic fondness for than go through the motions of grinding Hellstars with some one and making us both feel a bit diritier just for the sake of some contrived social pressures. 

I'm tactically handicapped, to put it in terms Censortron won't likely make look worse than they are, so I'm assuming it's more likely that I'm failing to see why peops can't just discourage boaters by showing them how a real 'mech is built than that peops with access to this forum simply can't grasp the concept of sharing heat sinks to get more out of them.  There's probably a reason we see weeping and gnashing of teeth over "lame" or "cheesy" boat setups.  TBH I'm not sure it's not simply ignorance, but how long can the half-life really be for some one in the play group noticing that those awesome PPC and lasers are all more than half heat sink by weight and that those PPC start to lose effectiveness just as the ML comes into optimum range?

Some people are playing to win more than playing for flavor.  These people are looking for good sound tactical responses to these problems which is why I am presenting my arguments on these grounds rather than on the basis of unquantifiable flavor.

As for ignorance, you should never underestimate the ability of people to lie to themselves.

I can see that bracket setups are naively much more efficient than specialists, your 3/4 figure seeming about right, but I doubt it's worth an awful lot more or less than being able to have most of weapon X exactly where it's most useful, most of weapon Y where it's most useful, etc. if you've got a half-decent mind for wargaming and/or your opponent is a derpnugget like myself.  There's some things to be said about eggs and baskets, and I agree with you there.  I am much more comfortable with commander-style sturdy JOATs and "whatever, I can do it that way too" anchors than sharper but more brittle tools.  However, those dedicated CQB specialists and bombardment machines and such all trying to Knight's Fork my dumb ass can be more threatening if they are properly deployed.

The problem with this is that the enemy will be doing their best to either prevent you from getting those specialists where you want them or turn your attempts to move your specialists to their optimal ranges into their divide and conquer.  Now, I cannot speak to your games, but I am getting the distinct impression that you are letting the enemy do what they want so you fall right into their gambits rather than turning the tables on them like you should.

Heh.  My group is myself, generally.  I sometimes play with other people over Megamek (hi MekSlayer!), but mostly I play the Against-The -Bot campaign.  When I asked the question, I figured it was a solved problem, so to speak, and someone would have a formula of some kind handy.  Imagine my surprise when this thread blew up the way it did!

I'm beginning to understand the benefits of having bracket fire available, at least in the 3025 era with single heat sinks for non-light mechs.  They have more tonnage than heat to spare.  But once you get into double heat sinks, and particularly with Clan weaponry, it's hard to justify not piling on the Medium Pulse Lasers.  The IS versions are largely useless (I read that thread), but the Clan ones are so good that once you have a few long range weapons available, why use anything else?

The tonnage benefits for bracketing are still there, especially with lighter Clan energy weapons.

As for the Clan Pulse Lasers, they are vastly overrated.  The only reason they get so much attention is that players like shoving 4/5 green pilots into their Clan 'Mechs because they do not want to pay for better pilots which makes the pulse lasers look far better than they really are.  If you use the 2/3 veterans which are actually more common in canon you get that same bonus with everything, and start seeing that stacking additional pulse bonuses are really only worthwhile if you are up against fast ground units capable of maintaining at least a +4 TMM.  The problem with this is that you tend to loose weight to your superior piloting skills when balancing under BV so you need room to maneuver and keep the range open so the enemy cannot drive the numbers low enough to give them the advantage.

Have to agree with you that Clan LPL and Clan MPL's are too good and too powerful... Even on the Wars of Reaving Mekwars Server they had to limit the number of LPL used in forces to keep game balance. Which goes to show that there is a need to make games fun and playable, but still allow ppl to customize their mechs, look at MWO. They couldn't stop the mechlab from happening. As for IS MPL's there is a huge advantage in them, as Jumping IS MPL boats have  low BV, so they are very effective in mass combat.

If memory serves that server had a lot of stupid rules which prevent countering them which is the only reason they look overpowered.

So what rules can each of you formulate that would keep every satisfied from preventing the cheesy munchkin designs, such as Clan ERPPCs on light mechs, Gaussilla's,  Hellstar's, etc...???

I think with rules set to limit all custom and canon mech designs to a maximum of 1 weapon  of any specific type, then all players might agree that any mech made under this rule would not be considered a boat / munchkin. Do you agree or disagree and why?

Is it because of Dual HGR's? Dual HAG40's? Even Dual AC20's?

Remove all restrictions, give players plenty of room, encourage combined arms, and encourage good pilots.  All the supposedly overpowered weapons are only that way because people do not allow their counters to be used.

[DireWolfV]

Mixing weapon types on a single frame and investing in bracket setups is generally superior.  Mixing weapon types makes your force more resilient because you do not loose the ability to deal with certain threats when you loose a single specialist.  Using brackets mean your 'Mechs will all be hitting at about 75% of what a specialist does at either range which gives you an overall edge over a mixture of specialists which will have to leave entire 'Mechs out of the fight (adding some specialists to a bracketing body can give an advantage though).

Why can't you just sprinkle in a couple generalists to back up your specialists?

Also what if your generalist Mech loses a weapon? In that case it might actually be less versatile because the loss of its long-range weapon means it now has to fight at close-range, and now it has to fight at close-medium range against close-medium specialists or stay out of the fight entirely.

As for the Clan Pulse Lasers, they are vastly overrated.  The only reason they get so much attention is that players like shoving 4/5 green pilots into their Clan 'Mechs because they do not want to pay for better pilots which makes the pulse lasers look far better than they really are.  If you use the 2/3 veterans which are actually more common in canon you get that same bonus with everything, and start seeing that stacking additional pulse bonuses are really only worthwhile if you are up against fast ground units capable of maintaining at least a +4 TMM.  The problem with this is that you tend to loose weight to your superior piloting skills when balancing under BV so you need room to maneuver and keep the range open so the enemy cannot drive the numbers low enough to give them the advantage.

With a TC you can use Pulse Lasers and better pilots to focus fire at specific locations.

[Shin Ji]

With a TC you can use Pulse Lasers and better pilots to focus fire at specific locations.

I'm pretty sure that's not legal anymore.

[DireWolfV]

I'm pretty sure that's not legal anymore.

What's not legal anymore? You can use pulse lasers with targeting computers for a -3 to-hit, and you can also use aimed shots with regular/ER Lasers and other direct fire weapons to make aimed shots at vulnerable points.

[Feign]

What's not legal anymore? You can use pulse lasers with targeting computers for a -3 to-hit, and you can also use aimed shots with regular/ER Lasers and other direct fire weapons to make aimed shots at vulnerable points.

I don't have the books on me, but I recall Pulse Lasers, multishot autocannons (UACs, and RACs) and weapons that use the Cluster Hits table being forbidden from making called shots, even with a TC.

[Diablo48]

Why can't you just sprinkle in a couple generalists to back up your specialists?

I did mention this, however you generally want to lean more towards a handful of specialists supporting generalists, especially if they are armed with IS LRMs.  If you do not have many generalists in your fire support formation then you will either have serious problems with it being overrun by enemy brawlers or you will have to stiffen it with your own close quarters specialists which costs you more than what you get from the long range specialists.

Also what if your generalist Mech loses a weapon? In that case it might actually be less versatile because the loss of its long-range weapon means it now has to fight at close-range, and now it has to fight at close-medium range against close-medium specialists or stay out of the fight entirely.

While this is problematic, you generally do not start loosing weapons until the 'Mech is about to go down anyways so this is probably a sign that the unit in question should start retreating.  Of course, bad luck does happen, especially with floating TACs against smaller 'Mechs which cannot afford multiple long range weapons, but that should be rare enough to not be a huge concern.  If it does, it means that 'Mech is probably going to be pressed into bodyguard duty or sent back for repairs depending on the situation, but given the string of bad luck required I think it is safe enough to leave this up to battlefield improvisation.

With a TC you can use Pulse Lasers and better pilots to focus fire at specific locations.

No, this got ruled out a long time ago.  You only get the cumulative -3 to hit which is rather pointless most of the time when you already have a 2 gunner.

[Cheleron Lightning]

I typically use a mix of weapons to balance heat/mass/range, determined by the Mech's speed and purpose.

For example, the non-Omni version of my Ogre (100t IS L.2, OGR-3R) uses an ER-PPC, an LRM20, a Gauss Rifle, and 3 Medium Lasers. It is slow (3/5) and heavily armored, with a standard engine and CASE. I expect it to hang back and pummel the enemy, so it focuses on long-range weapons. The weapons are varied to balance heat, even with double heat sinks. It has 3 medium lasers, but it relies on long-range combat so it is not a laser boat.

Another custom Mech, the Werewolf Prime (60t IS L.2, WER2-O) has a speed of 5/8 and only 168p armor. It is designed to charge the enemy and hit hard until only one is left standing. It features 2 ER-Large Lasers for softening up the enemy, 4 S-SRM4 for efficient attacks even while still charging, and 2 MPL for point-blank combat. Its focus on S-SRMs might classify it as a missile boat but it relies on three types of weapons. The large lasers have an important role of weakening the enemy and striking at ranges outside missile range. It uses the missiles to inflict heavy damage on the enemy but doesn't rely on them exclusively. Is it a missile boat?

[DireWolfV]

I did mention this, however you generally want to lean more towards a handful of specialists supporting generalists, especially if they are armed with IS LRMs.  If you do not have many generalists in your fire support formation then you will either have serious problems with it being overrun by enemy brawlers or you will have to stiffen it with your own close quarters specialists which costs you more than what you get from the long range specialists.

But the fact is specialists are more efficient. All things being equal, a group of specialists will tear the generalists to pieces in a head-on engagement. Using an army of generalists means you are either counting on the opponent to make a series of mistakes or relying on a good amount of luck.

While this is problematic, you generally do not start loosing weapons until the 'Mech is about to go down anyways so this is probably a sign that the unit in question should start retreating.  Of course, bad luck does happen, especially with floating TACs against smaller 'Mechs which cannot afford multiple long range weapons, but that should be rare enough to not be a huge concern.  If it does, it means that 'Mech is probably going to be pressed into bodyguard duty or sent back for repairs depending on the situation, but given the string of bad luck required I think it is safe enough to leave this up to battlefield improvisation.

Okay maybe, but there are other ways to lose a weapon, such as running out of ammo.

No, this got ruled out a long time ago.  You only get the cumulative -3 to hit which is rather pointless most of the time when you already have a 2 gunner.

Just switch, use the PLs plus TC to soften them up then focus fire with other weapons on damaged locations.

[Diablo48]

But the fact is specialists are more efficient. All things being equal, a group of specialists will tear the generalists to pieces in a head-on engagement. Using an army of generalists means you are either counting on the opponent to make a series of mistakes or relying on a good amount of luck.

This is simply wrong.  The specialists are more powerful but less efficient.  They get extra power in their specialty, but it is not nearly as efficient as a good bracket setup which lets them reuse DHS mass by alternating weapons.  Generally speaking what this means is a generalist will have about 75% of the specialist's firepower, but it will also have about 75% of the other specialist's firepower for a net worth of 150%.

In combat, the specialists only win if the generalists let them do what they want to.  If you have a group of pure long range specialists I can march my generalists right up to them without taking too much more damage than I inflict in the process, but once I get close my force has an enormous advantage in firepower because I am much better armed for close combat which is usually enough to turn the battle in my favor.  This tactic is actually less dependent on the enemy making mistakes because you have a solution no matter what they do unlike specialists which are sunk if the enemy can throw a wrench in their plans.

Okay maybe, but there are other ways to lose a weapon, such as running out of ammo.

Ammo in particular should never be so low that running out is a serious concern, so once again if you run dry on a significant portion of your firepower then it is probably time to fall back anyways.

[DireWolfV]

This is simply wrong. The specialists are more powerful but less efficient.

I presumed it was understood that being more powerful and more efficient would mean in the same thing in Battletech.

They get extra power in their specialty, but it is not nearly as efficient as a good bracket setup which lets them reuse DHS mass by alternating weapons.  Generally speaking what this means is a generalist will have about 75% of the specialist's firepower, but it will also have about 75% of the other specialist's firepower for a net worth of 150%.

On what basis are these percentages being established? How do you know the average generalist has "75%" of the specialists firepower and not 50%?

And even if that is correct, would the cumulative nature of said benefits create a gulf larger then the 25% when we start getting to Stars, Binaries, Trinaries, Clusters and Galaxies? 25% more firepower here, and 25% there, and so on, 5, 10, 20+ times in a row, it all adds up.

In combat, the specialists only win if the generalists let them do what they want to.  If you have a group of pure long range specialists I can march my generalists right up to them without taking too much more damage than I inflict in the process, but once I get close my force has an enormous advantage in firepower because I am much better armed for close combat which is usually enough to turn the battle in my favor. This tactic is actually less dependent on the enemy making mistakes because you have a solution no matter what they do unlike specialists which are sunk if the enemy can throw a wrench in their plans.

Ammo in particular should never be so low that running out is a serious concern, so once again if you run dry on a significant portion of your firepower then it is probably time to fall back anyways.

Isn't the scenario noted above presuming that the long-range specialists are just standing there and letting the generalists do what they want to do?

[Feign]

I presumed it was understood that being more powerful and more efficient would mean in the same thing in Battletech.

Powerful is in terms of amount of damage dealt per turn.  Efficient is in terms of amount of damage done per point of BV.  The two are very very different, and your presumption seems to indicate that you didn't understand what this argument was about in the first place.

On what basis are these percentages being established? How do you know the average generalist has "75%" of the specialists firepower and not 50%?

And even if that is correct, would the cumulative nature of said benefits create a gulf larger then the 25% when we start getting to Stars, Binaries, Trinaries, Clusters and Galaxies? 25% more firepower here, and 25% there, and so on, 5, 10, 20+ times in a row, it all adds up.

I'm certain he's not running calculations to get the exact percentage of firepower, since as you state there isn't just one generalist and just one specialist.  His number seems about right for comparing two similar BV IS mechs.  Of course, if you're comparing a Hellstar to an Albatross, then yes, obviously you're going to get a different result

Isn't the scenario noted above presuming that the long-range specialists are just standing there and letting the generalists do what they want to do?

Because the ranged specialists can just walk backwards and fire indefinitely, right? ::)

[Diablo48]

I presumed it was understood that being more powerful and more efficient would mean in the same thing in Battletech.

Efficiency is based on how well mass is being utilized, power is raw damage output.

On what basis are these percentages being established? How do you know the average generalist has "75%" of the specialists firepower and not 50%?

And even if that is correct, would the cumulative nature of said benefits create a gulf larger then the 25% when we start getting to Stars, Binaries, Trinaries, Clusters and Galaxies? 25% more firepower here, and 25% there, and so on, 5, 10, 20+ times in a row, it all adds up.

That was a rough estimate based on my experience designing over a thousand custom designs of various technology bases and levels.  Still, this design provides an easy baseline when stacked up against the similar Hellstar.

Code: [Select]



Mass: 95 tons
Tech Base: Clan
Chassis Config: Biped
Rules Level: Tournament Legal
Era: Clan Invasion
Tech Rating/Era Availability: F/X-X-D
Production Year: 3070
Cost: 26,753,350 C-Bills
Battle Value: 3,350

Chassis: Unknown Endo-Steel
Power Plant: Unknown 380 Fusion XL Engine
Walking Speed: 43.2 km/h
Maximum Speed: 64.8 km/h
Jump Jets: None
    Jump Capacity: 0 meters
Armor: Unknown Ferro-Fibrous
Armament:
    3  ER PPCs
    6  Medium Pulse Lasers
    4  ER Medium Lasers
    1  Flamer
Manufacturer: Unknown
    Primary Factory: Unknown
Communications System: Unknown
Targeting and Tracking System: Unknown

================================================================================
Equipment           Type                         Rating                   Mass 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Structure: Endo-Steel                   145 points                5.00
    Internal Locations: 1 LT, 1 RT, 3 LA, 2 RA
Engine:             XL Fusion Engine             380                      20.50
    Walking MP: 4
    Running MP: 6
    Jumping MP: 0
Heat Sinks:         Double Heat Sink             23(46)                   13.00
    Heat Sink Locations: 3 LT, 3 RT, 1 LL, 1 RL
Gyro:               Standard                                               4.00
Cockpit:            Standard                                               3.00
    Actuators:      L: SH+UA    R: SH+UA
Armor:              Ferro-Fibrous                AV - 288                 15.00
    Armor Locations: 1 LT, 1 RT, 2 LA, 3 RA

                                                      Internal       Armor     
                                                      Structure      Factor     
                                                Head     3            9         
                                        Center Torso     30           47       
                                 Center Torso (rear)                  12       
                                           L/R Torso     20           30       
                                    L/R Torso (rear)                  10       
                                             L/R Arm     16           31       
                                             L/R Leg     20           39       

================================================================================
Equipment                                 Location    Heat    Critical    Mass 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Medium Pulse Lasers                        RA        12        3         6.00
2 ER Medium Lasers                           RA        10        2         2.00
3 Medium Pulse Lasers                        LA        12        3         6.00
2 ER Medium Lasers                           LA        10        2         2.00
ER PPC                                       RT        15        2         6.00
ER PPC                                       LT        15        2         6.00
ER PPC                                       CT        15        2         6.00
Flamer                                       HD        3         1         0.50
                                            Free Critical Slots: 0

BattleForce Statistics
MV      S (+0)  M (+2)  L (+4)  E (+6)   Wt.   Ov   Armor:     10    Points: 34
4          7       7       3       0      4     2   Structure:  5
Special Abilities: ENE, SRCH, ES, SEAL, SOA
We clearly sacrifice exactly 25% of the long range damage potential (3 ERPPCs vs. 4) and gain a mass of assorted Medium Lasers capable of dishing out far more damage in close combat.  It can still be outperformed by a close quarters specialist like the Kodiak, but it is once again not very far behind in that area and gains a tremendous amount of long range damage.

Isn't the scenario noted above presuming that the long-range specialists are just standing there and letting the generalists do what they want to do?

You can advance at a run and retreat at a walk.  That means this design is guaranteed to be able to close at least 2 hexes per turn, and is likely to be able to close faster in practice because the clear line of fire means the terrain between the two designs is probably fairly easy to cross, but the retreating Hellstar has no such guarantee.  It is also making the assumption that there is no terrain the generalist can use to restrict line of sight while it closes because that could potentially force the fight to start within range of the close quarters battery.  This discrepancy also increases in favor of the generalist as you move towards smaller and faster designs which have a larger absolute difference between their walking and running mp which will allow them to close faster than assaults like the ones discussed here.

[DireWolfV]

Powerful is in terms of amount of damage dealt per turn.  Efficient is in terms of amount of damage done per point of BV.  The two are very very different, and your presumption seems to indicate that you didn't understand what this argument was about in the first place.

The amount of damage a Mech does per turn can often correlate with the amount done per point of BV, and a Mech that is "25% more efficient" (whatever that means, I am presuming it means damage done for the given range bracket) is doing both.

I'm certain he's not running calculations to get the exact percentage of firepower, since as you state there isn't just one generalist and just one specialist.  His number seems about right for comparing two similar BV IS mechs.  Of course, if you're comparing a Hellstar to an Albatross, then yes, obviously you're going to get a different result

Can you elaborate on what you mean by his numbers "seem" "about right"?

Also using BV here is not really reasonable by any means. BV is meant to balance the game, so it stands to reason that a superior Mech is by its very nature going to have a higher BV then an inferior Mech. A Mech that is 200% more efficient in every imaginable way, is, by its very nature going to have a much higher BV, if the BV system is staying true to its function of retaining balance.

Because the ranged specialists can just walk backwards and fire indefinitely, right? ::)

And I said this where?

Efficiency is based on how well mass is being utilized, power is raw damage output.

Wouldn't how powerful a Mech is be indicative of how well the mass was being utilized?

That was a rough estimate based on my experience designing over a thousand custom designs of various technology bases and levels.  Still, this design provides an easy baseline when stacked up against the similar Hellstar.

Code: [Select]



Mass: 95 tons
Tech Base: Clan
Chassis Config: Biped
Rules Level: Tournament Legal
Era: Clan Invasion
Tech Rating/Era Availability: F/X-X-D
Production Year: 3070
Cost: 26,753,350 C-Bills
Battle Value: 3,350

Chassis: Unknown Endo-Steel
Power Plant: Unknown 380 Fusion XL Engine
Walking Speed: 43.2 km/h
Maximum Speed: 64.8 km/h
Jump Jets: None
    Jump Capacity: 0 meters
Armor: Unknown Ferro-Fibrous
Armament:
    3  ER PPCs
    6  Medium Pulse Lasers
    4  ER Medium Lasers
    1  Flamer
Manufacturer: Unknown
    Primary Factory: Unknown
Communications System: Unknown
Targeting and Tracking System: Unknown

================================================================================
Equipment           Type                         Rating                   Mass 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Structure: Endo-Steel                   145 points                5.00
    Internal Locations: 1 LT, 1 RT, 3 LA, 2 RA
Engine:             XL Fusion Engine             380                      20.50
    Walking MP: 4
    Running MP: 6
    Jumping MP: 0
Heat Sinks:         Double Heat Sink             23(46)                   13.00
    Heat Sink Locations: 3 LT, 3 RT, 1 LL, 1 RL
Gyro:               Standard                                               4.00
Cockpit:            Standard                                               3.00
    Actuators:      L: SH+UA    R: SH+UA
Armor:              Ferro-Fibrous                AV - 288                 15.00
    Armor Locations: 1 LT, 1 RT, 2 LA, 3 RA

                                                      Internal       Armor     
                                                      Structure      Factor     
                                                Head     3            9         
                                        Center Torso     30           47       
                                 Center Torso (rear)                  12       
                                           L/R Torso     20           30       
                                    L/R Torso (rear)                  10       
                                             L/R Arm     16           31       
                                             L/R Leg     20           39       

================================================================================
Equipment                                 Location    Heat    Critical    Mass 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Medium Pulse Lasers                        RA        12        3         6.00
2 ER Medium Lasers                           RA        10        2         2.00
3 Medium Pulse Lasers                        LA        12        3         6.00
2 ER Medium Lasers                           LA        10        2         2.00
ER PPC                                       RT        15        2         6.00
ER PPC                                       LT        15        2         6.00
ER PPC                                       CT        15        2         6.00
Flamer                                       HD        3         1         0.50
                                            Free Critical Slots: 0

BattleForce Statistics
MV      S (+0)  M (+2)  L (+4)  E (+6)   Wt.   Ov   Armor:     10    Points: 34
4          7       7       3       0      4     2   Structure:  5
Special Abilities: ENE, SRCH, ES, SEAL, SOA
We clearly sacrifice exactly 25% of the long range damage potential (3 ERPPCs vs. 4) and gain a mass of assorted Medium Lasers capable of dishing out far more damage in close combat.  It can still be outperformed by a close quarters specialist like the Kodiak, but it is once again not very far behind in that area and gains a tremendous amount of long range damage.

You are comparing a custom design to a canon design.....I would prefer the Cygnus vs the Hellstar, though truth be told finding non-specialized Clan Mechs is pretty hard in the 95 ton bracket aside from certain Omni builds. In this case "efficiency" goes up to +70%.

You can advance at a run and retreat at a walk.  That means this design is guaranteed to be able to close at least 2 hexes per turn, and is likely to be able to close faster in practice because the clear line of fire means the terrain between the two designs is probably fairly easy to cross, but the retreating Hellstar has no such guarantee.  It is also making the assumption that there is no terrain the generalist can use to restrict line of sight while it closes because that could potentially force the fight to start within range of the close quarters battery.  This discrepancy also increases in favor of the generalist as you move towards smaller and faster designs which have a larger absolute difference between their walking and running mp which will allow them to close faster than assaults like the ones discussed here.

Not if there are Jump Jets, let alone Improved Jump Jets, and then terrain also matters. If it is a relatively flat environment punctuated by patches of rough terrain, hills, water or sandtraps then my long-range specialists can keep distance with your generalists forever.

Last- It should be noted that you did not confront my point about cumulative advantage. Even with your 25% number which is hardly proven, the fact is when we get to groups we start getting to way higher percentages. Lance vs Lance 100%, Company vs. Company this is almost 300%. Combine this with focus fire. Of course this is purely abstracted, factors like terrain do matter, the fact that two Mechs cannot occupy the same hex also matters, but in general as the scale of battle increases, these efficiencies accumulate.

[Wales Grey]

How do you all avoid the boating trap?

Boating isn't a trap, it's a result of the realities of gameplay. Specialists are always more effective than generalists, absent other factors. Complaining about 'boating' is like complaining about double heat sinks effectively rendering single heat sinks pointless, or about how the HBK-4P is vastly superior to the HBK-4G, or about how LB-X autocannons are just flat out better than normal autocannons in all but the most peripheral gameplay situations. Battletech's rules are what make boating a 'thing', and those aren't changing any time soon. _{(Reboot in 3325, re-write all the rules, I believe in you, Catalyst)}

[CloaknDagger]

You are comparing a custom design to a canon design.....I would prefer the Cygnus vs the Hellstar, though truth be told finding non-specialized Clan Mechs is pretty hard in the 95 ton bracket aside from certain Omni builds. In this case "efficiency" goes up to +70%.

Oh god. The Cygnus is disgustingly terrible.

[Sabelkatten]

Boating isn't a trap, it's a result of the realities of gameplay. Specialists are always more effective than generalists, absent other factors. Complaining about 'boating' is like complaining about double heat sinks effectively rendering single heat sinks pointless, or about how the HBK-4P is vastly superior to the HBK-4G, or about how LB-X autocannons are just flat out better than normal autocannons in all but the most peripheral gameplay situations. Battletech's rules are what make boating a 'thing', and those aren't changing any time soon. _{(Reboot in 3325, re-write all the rules, I believe in you, Catalyst)}

Considering a lot of players pick the good old TBolt (in 3025) rather than "boat" designs like the HBK or Archer, I'd say the idea that specialist are always better is heavily contended!

Now if you have a very specific mission in mind a "boat" can be the best choice. But it's usually not "boating" that's the main thing, but rather mission specialization: A fast close-range mech with, say, a PR, a streak-6 and twin MPLs is hardly a "boat", but still pretty specialized. Same goes for a mech with an ERPPC/GR/LRM combo for fire support.

But if you can't be sure you'll be able to use your specialists the way you've intended generalists often is a better choice. And remember, your plan might be great, but that doesn't mean the enemy's plan might not be greater!

[Feign]

Also using BV here is not really reasonable by any means. BV is meant to balance the game, so it stands to reason that a superior Mech is by its very nature going to have a higher BV then an inferior Mech. A Mech that is 200% more efficient in every imaginable way, is, by its very nature going to have a much higher BV, if the BV system is staying true to its function of retaining balance.

I'm pretty sure I've exhausted all reasonable options with regards to communicating my point, therefore I'll just refrain from further debate with you.

Oh god. The Cygnus is disgustingly terrible.

Since he's comparing to the Hellstar, I think he might be talking about the Cygnus 3, which mounts four HAG20s with 8 shots each... and nothing else.

Okay, that is pretty bad...  Horribly bad in fact.

But I guess in that minute and 20 seconds of combat time before it's effectively dead, it has a chance of doing more damage than a Hellstar...  In five point clusters...  Often with a penalty...

Okay, it's bad.

EDIT:  If you lop off the arms of the Cygnus 3 and replace them with the arms of a Hellstar and cram the engine with heatsinks, you get a reasonably scary mech.  HAGs for crit-seeking with 50% more ammo per gun, and ERPPCs for hole punching... and all totally heat neutral.

[CloaknDagger]

EDIT:  If you lop off the arms of the Cygnus 3 and replace them with the arms of a Hellstar and cram the engine with heatsinks, you get a reasonably scary mech.  HAGs for crit-seeking with 50% more ammo per gun, and ERPPCs for hole punching... and all totally heat neutral.

HAG-20s are also terrible. They're overweight LRM-20s with quirks.

The HAG-40 at least is more efficient. Even then, the heat from what's supposed to be a gauss means that it's best to put it on a Vee.

[Feign]

HAG-20s are also terrible. They're overweight LRM-20s with quirks.

If you're using Clan LRMs as your baseline, then the only good weapons anywhere ever are the iATM and the Clan ERPPC.

Perhaps try making a few succession war era designs to re-calibrate your standards. #P

[CloaknDagger]

If you're using Clan LRMs as your baseline, then the only good weapons anywhere ever are the iATM and the Clan ERPPC.

Perhaps try making a few succession war era designs to re-calibrate your standards. #P

Yes, I use Clan tech as my basis when looking at Clan tech.

[Caesar Steiner for Archon]

You are comparing a custom design to a canon design.....I would prefer the Cygnus vs the Hellstar, though truth be told finding non-specialized Clan Mechs is pretty hard in the 95 ton bracket aside from certain Omni builds. In this case "efficiency" goes up to +70%.

The Hellstar is a min-maxed canon design, so there's effectively no difference between it and a custom.

[Feign]

Yes, I use Clan tech as my basis when looking at Clan tech.

Perhaps my suggestion muddled my point.  among Clan weapons, the LRM is the third best weapon choice they have.  (for a long time the second best, until the iATM)  I'm not saying to judge Clan weapons with the LB 5-X Autocannon as a baseline, but something more middle-of-the-road than the LRM20.

[Sabelkatten]

The Hellstar is a min-maxed canon design, so there's effectively no difference between it and a custom.

Arguably, the variant I made which downgraded two of the ERPPC to ERLLs to fit in a TC is even worse. But it's a fine line... ;)