Author Topic: MOT? - Nightsky  (Read 11340 times)

Greatclub

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3061
MOT? - Nightsky
« on: 17 February 2020, 01:49:54 »
Nightsky.

Quote
Looks at a Hatchetman

Look at a Nightsky.

Flicks the Hatchetman over with a finger, proceeds to hug the Nightsky

Declares Nightsky is what the 3050 hatchetman (Guy doesn’t even get capitalized anymore) should have been.

Wonders why it isn’t more popular

Looks at Wraith from same TRO.

Oh yeah. Overshadowed.

The Nightsky is a medium melee mech from TRO:3055. It’s a Lyran (Initially FedCom) design produced on Hesperus. It’s an interesting looking design, angular, with a flat front and a toothy head projecting forward; depending on the paint job it can look lizard-like.

It is respectably fast for fifty tons, at 6/9/6. At The basic model is the -4S, costing 1159 BV(2.) Armor isn’t maxed, but is close, with only the arms unable to pass the gauss threshold on the front. The back is notably thinner over an XL engine, which is a handicap for a close combat mech. As such it really wants to be one of the last mechs to move.

Weapons are very short ranged; the big gun is a large pulse laser, backed up by two medium pulse lasers and a small. This lets you jump and shoot with a reasonable chance of hitting. There are enough heat sinks that you only have to worry about movement heat on an alpha. Given how often I tend to jump when using one, this is on the low side of enough, although even that is out of immediate to-hit penalties.

The Hatchet on the arm? It deals ten points. That alone endears it to me over the hatchetman, as it can do internal damage and crits if it bops somebody on the cockpit.

Don’t like the large pulse laser and think it’s the most useless thing in the game? Then wait three years until 3056 and grab a -4T. It replaces the big gun with an ER large laser, letting you reach out and touch somebody. The remaining two tons are spent... debatably. A small laser isn’t a bad thing for a berserker mech, but the anti-missile system introduces ammo vulnerabilities for minimal defensive gains. Running hotter, carrying explodium over an XL and costing roughly 115 BV more makes this a lesser option compared to the base model, IMHO. But if you gotta have a gun with range, go for it.

Remember how I said that the -4S was a bit undersinked? You can’t say that about the -5S. It is the model you want to take if you know you’ll be fighting in a desert or against inferno missiles, and never else. Three extra heat sinks means it runs iced over, especially since it gets the weight for them from the jump jets. -5S are cheaper than base Nightsky, but the loss in mobility just isn’t worth it.

-5T, first produced in ‘57, is another LPL hate mech. It replaces it with an ER-PPC. This gives you a good, heat free and mobile long range bracket, but once you get in close you’re either painfully oversinked or undersinked depending on if you drop the big gun. At two hundred BV more expensive, I will once again take the specialist over this generalist. Even more so than with the -4T, you may chose otherwise.

The -6S replaces the XL engine with a light, a significant improvement. Unfortunately, the armament passes impractical on the way to absurd. Seven ER-medium lasers completely overwhelm the cooling loop even before you jump. Replacing some with medium pulses or vanilla mediums is what I’d do if I got one in a campaign, but  stock you better have trigger discipline until it’s time to go all-in. Given that the cost is 320 points over a ‘-4s Nightsky, I’ll pick the one with weapons I can use over the survival boost.

Last is the -6T, which is the one I WOULD use over the base model. Why? Triple Strength Myomer. TSM. 20 point hatchet hits. It might cost only a hair less than a -6S, but now it is a true melee ‘mech. It sacrifices a MPL for an ER medium and a pair of ER small, letting you fine-tune the heat. Side-grading one of the smalls to a base model for still finer heat tuning would be useful, but that’s the only real quibble I have with it. Get close, heat up, and smash out somebody’s back.

And always remember – Insert Hatchet A Into Head B.




UPDATE

New Nightsky in RG27, a very good issuing for 3055 mechs. Once again it’s mixed tech... but said tech was used intelligently.

Armor tonnage was shaved but is marginally better through heavy ferro. The point the side torsos desperately needed for the dual gauss threshold was put on the legs instead. On the other hand, the XL engine became a clan XL, meaning it can survive the loss of a side torso. This will probably buy it extra turns of life, possibly even combat-effective ones. 

Weaponry was revamped across the board. The small pulse laser became a small x-pulse laser, for blending infantry at standoff distances. A large x-pulse in the left arm has some actual range and a pulse bonus, yet doesn’t do horrible things to the budget. The clan medium lasers do lose the pulse bonus, but given the much improved range (equal to the big x-pulse) they usually come out ahead.

Some of the weight saved goes into more heat sinks; the three range 15 guns are heat-neutral at a run. AES is added to the hatchet, which... it’s a hatchet without TSM, more accurate or not.

Overall the -7S Nightsky is much better. This is another one I’d seriously consider paying 320 BV for over the base model, for more options in how to fight and increased suitability.

In the event of forum crash or post loss, this post may be restored by any who have it.
« Last Edit: 11 March 2023, 14:04:25 by Greatclub »

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25835
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #1 on: 17 February 2020, 01:52:40 »
I never understood why it took so long to get a TSM variant of this mech.
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman

Greatclub

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3061
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #2 on: 17 February 2020, 01:54:58 »
I've never understood why there are no TSM axmen or hatchetmen. (Still no capitals letters from me)
« Last Edit: 17 February 2020, 02:01:23 by Greatclub »

garhkal

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6648
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #3 on: 17 February 2020, 02:14:33 »
Or for that matter, an axeman with TSM.  BUT then again, i'd have liked to see MORE mechs at the sweet spots (30/45/60/75/90 tons) sporting hatchets....
It's not who you kill, but how they die!
You can't shoot what you can't see.
You can not dodge it if you don't know it's coming.

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25835
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #4 on: 17 February 2020, 02:34:49 »
Instead, the first hatchet-packing mech we got TSM on was... the Scarabus.  Which couldn't even use it effectively due to not having enough weapons to overheat itself.
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman

SteelRaven

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9597
  • Fight for something or Die for nothing
    • The Steel-Raven at DeviantArt
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #5 on: 17 February 2020, 04:01:23 »
Yes, the Nightsky. The lovechild of the Hatchetman and the Griffin Sparky
Battletech Art and Commissions
http://steel-raven.deviantart.com

Nikas_Zekeval

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1624
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #6 on: 17 February 2020, 10:25:25 »
I think the -5T works fine.  One the ER PPC gives it an option for fights that happen outside a phone booth.

Two, it can work as a alpha-jump/cool down cycle.

Say you run up to club someone, full alpha plus run in 27 heat.  Okay, movement mod, but just shy of targeting mod.

Now jump to cover (you did have a cover spot within 180 meters when you planned, this, right?).  that is 13 of 20 heat for the round.  Enough for both MPLs if someone manages to get around to you, and just plus 1 heat.

Or if ground movement is still viable?  7 heat left over, plus a run, plus the pulse lasers leaves -1 heat.

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28994
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #7 on: 17 February 2020, 12:44:47 »
The -4S is one of those designs where in campaign, when they become available, I would have a hard time not putting a Snub PPC in place of the LPL for the 9 hex reach.  I also think its too bad we never got a Jihad era X-Pulse or Dark Age REL version.

The main mercs I have played with have a Nightsky though I do not think it has gotten into hatchet range often, its lance mates are all PPC'ers (WVR-8K x2 & Uziel 2S) which leaves it on clean up . . . things have not survived to get hatchet'd usually.
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

God and Davion

  • Excelencia Steiner
  • Administrator
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5972
  • This place for rent
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #8 on: 17 February 2020, 14:11:12 »
Great mech. It is like a P-Hawk with extra armor and a hatchet for extra friendship. The pulse weapons and the mobility are very good for flanking/counterflanking moves.  It is not a brawler mech but 6/9/6 units rarely are. The ER Medium version is crazy but it can survive using jump jets. Less good than the base one.

Also, very, very low BV. Do you want a filler unit? This one is very high in the list.
We are back again... but we never forget Albatross

Nightsong

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 556
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #9 on: 17 February 2020, 14:12:12 »
The -4S is one of those designs where in campaign, when they become available, I would have a hard time not putting a Snub PPC in place of the LPL for the 9 hex reach.  I also think its too bad we never got a Jihad era X-Pulse or Dark Age REL version.

The main mercs I have played with have a Nightsky though I do not think it has gotten into hatchet range often, its lance mates are all PPC'ers (WVR-8K x2 & Uziel 2S) which leaves it on clean up . . . things have not survived to get hatchet'd usually.

Maybe I’m weird but I like LPLs, though the X or RE options definitely have their appeal. The pulses all help counter the jumping, allowing a good way to forest/building cover until you’re in range for a depleted uranium back rub. I don’t mind long range weapons on a melee ‘mech for closing in, but I like having a nasty up close bite to sidecar the melee.

Empyrus

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9121
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #10 on: 17 February 2020, 14:45:24 »
Wait, so, this is basically an better Hatchetman with terrible looks? Yaaawwwnnn.
I'll stick with the classic for melee, and a Phoenix Hawk or the like for 6/9/6 movement.

garhkal

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6648
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #11 on: 17 February 2020, 14:47:03 »
Me neither.  Yea, it takes 2 more tons than a regular or ER large, with somewhat sucky range, but generally on hatcheters, you're wanting to be close...
It's not who you kill, but how they die!
You can't shoot what you can't see.
You can not dodge it if you don't know it's coming.

grimlock1

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2087
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #12 on: 17 February 2020, 15:24:12 »
Maybe I’m weird but I like LPLs, though the X or RE options definitely have their appeal. The pulses all help counter the jumping, allowing a good way to forest/building cover until you’re in range for a depleted uranium back rub. I don’t mind long range weapons on a melee ‘mech for closing in, but I like having a nasty up close bite to sidecar the melee.
I want to like LPL, but their short range eats up the pulse modifier.  Even with everybody jumping, the snubbie gives equal or better TH at anything past 3 hexes.
I'm rarely right... Except when I am.  ---  Idle question.  What is the BV2 of dread?
Apollo's Law- if it needs Clan tech to make it useable, It doesn't deserve those resources in the first place.
Sure it isn't the most practical 'mech ever designed, but it's a hundred ton axe-murderer. If loving that is wrong I don't wanna be right.

SteelRaven

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9597
  • Fight for something or Die for nothing
    • The Steel-Raven at DeviantArt
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #13 on: 17 February 2020, 15:29:17 »
Wait, so, this is basically an better Hatchetman with terrible looks? Yaaawwwnnn.
I'll stick with the classic for melee, and a Phoenix Hawk or the like for 6/9/6 movement.

So the extra armor has no appeal at all?

I question the art decisions myself but it's far from the worse looking mech in that TRO.
Battletech Art and Commissions
http://steel-raven.deviantart.com

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28994
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #14 on: 17 February 2020, 15:31:00 »
Me neither.  Yea, it takes 2 more tons than a regular or ER large, with somewhat sucky range, but generally on hatcheters, you're wanting to be close...

Is that in support of-

Maybe I’m weird but I like LPLs, though the X or RE options definitely have their appeal. The pulses all help counter the jumping, allowing a good way to forest/building cover until you’re in range for a depleted uranium back rub. I don’t mind long range weapons on a melee ‘mech for closing in, but I like having a nasty up close bite to sidecar the melee.

In which case grimlock beat me to it . . . and do not forget, it hits out further though for less damage, at 9 & under it gets 1 more damage than the LPL, and finally you get 1t back to play with in the design.

The Nightsky and Wraith have always been to me the top two candidates for Snubs replacing their Large Pulse because now I do not have to get that close to cause damage until I want to do so- I would rather be 7-9 hexes behind someone and get that first 10 point shot to strip off back armor before closing in to fire again and use my other pulse lasers.  If I have time make the play (or position/init forces the movement), it increases the chance of criticals when I do close.

But sticking with the all pulse configuration is why I mentioned X-Pulse and REL as future options that were not taken.

The other thing for me is, when I see a Nightsky . . . it becomes a target- a easier to hit Wraith.  While it may not be able to do much to me past 6 hexes, I want to focus and knock it down to help protect my flanks.  It does not draw quite the same attention as a Hunchback waddling its way forward, but its something to deal with while exchanging ranged fire.
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

Empyrus

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9121
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #15 on: 17 February 2020, 15:44:55 »
So the extra armor has no appeal at all?

I question the art decisions myself but it's far from the worse looking mech in that TRO.

The fact it is objectively better is my major issue with it. It is 50 tons which is better for melee and durability than 45 tons of the Hatchetman, it moves considerably faster which is good for melee and survivability, it has better arranged secondary weapons benefiting the design as a whole, it doesn't have anything explosive on-board, and finally, as you say, it has better armor.
In-universe, it seems like an excellent refinement of the Hatchetman concept.
IRL, it is both unnecessary (flaws can be corrected in variants), and boring (it doesn't actually differentiate itself beyond being a better Hatchetman).

I'm not saying same concept cannot be revisited in another 'Mech with similar weight class/role, i just feel those should be more than "X done right".

Greatclub

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3061
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #16 on: 17 February 2020, 16:05:32 »
I want to like LPL, but their short range eats up the pulse modifier.  Even with everybody jumping, the snubbie gives equal or better TH at anything past 3 hexes.

Yeah, that is a significant hidden cost of this and similar mechs - you have to move last if you want decent bang for buck.

A snubbie Nightsky would be somewhat worse under ideal circumstances and much better the rest of the time.

Minemech

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2764
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #17 on: 17 February 2020, 16:49:42 »
 It is also useful effective against infantry.

Caedis Animus

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2129
  • How can a bird be sultry? Very carefully.
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #18 on: 17 February 2020, 17:01:08 »
I think the second best part about the art is the little finger gun it's making. I can't get the mental image of a Nightsky going 'zoop!' while pointing at something out of my head.

Nikas_Zekeval

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1624
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #19 on: 17 February 2020, 19:13:07 »
Yeah, that is a significant hidden cost of this and similar mechs - you have to move last if you want decent bang for buck.

A snubbie Nightsky would be somewhat worse under ideal circumstances and much better the rest of the time.

Hence my preference for the ER PPC -5T over the -4S.  Sure, the later is marginally superior, if it gets to fight in its preferred range and style.  And helpless or nearly so if forced back or unable to close within even ten hexes.

The -5T has a higher heat load, and needs to ride the heat scale to get close to the -4S in DPM in a close in fight, but has backup options where closing is impossible or at least highly contraindicated.  And assuming the enemy will let you fight to your most advantageous is usually a recipe for a bad day.

2ndAcr

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3165
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #20 on: 17 February 2020, 19:17:14 »
 I have used the Nightsky in campaigns before, but the moment I get my hands on a Clan LPL and if really lucky some CMPL well, mixed tech we be.

 That upgrade does wonders for the Nightsky. Now you can reach out and tough at range until you want to make your move.

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28994
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #21 on: 17 February 2020, 22:42:59 »
*blows whistle louding while flinging yellow flags*

I have used the Nightsky in campaigns before, but the moment I get my hands on a Clan LPL and if really lucky some CMPL well, mixed tech we be.

 That upgrade does wonders for the Nightsky. Now you can reach out and tough at range until you want to make your move.

Violation of Apollo's Law ! . . .

Seriously, Clan weapons make most things better so its not a huge leap.
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

2ndAcr

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3165
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #22 on: 17 February 2020, 22:52:56 »
 I always had good luck with the standard 4S. Just have to pick the perfect moment to move in for the kill. A lance of 4S focusing on a single enemy is pretty brutal in itself.

 

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25835
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #23 on: 17 February 2020, 22:56:24 »
One would hope that 60 tons of lasers focused on the same target would, in fact, be quite brutal.
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman

Nikas_Zekeval

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1624
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #24 on: 17 February 2020, 23:00:19 »
*blows whistle louding while flinging yellow flags*

Violation of Apollo's Law ! . . .

Seriously, Clan weapons make most things better so its not a huge leap.

Yeah, not everyone has access to Clan salvage, and techs able to both maintain Clan Tech and kitbash it into an Inner Sphere non-omni chassis without ****** something up.

2ndAcr

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3165
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #25 on: 17 February 2020, 23:12:57 »
 Oh, my Clan tech Night Sky was a royal pain to keep everything running. Maybe 1 out of 5 battles would have everything working. If it was not an Elite rated tech, they did not breathe near that mech. And even then, it was a pain. But boy, I sure did love her.

 Only way to play, focus fire is god on the battlefield. The Inner Sphere was lucky the Clanners never played it that way from the get go. Of course if they would have, then I could see a Trinary beat down a Battalion. Nothing more demoralizing than watching your heaviest mech get melted by a Star in the first volley before you can even return fire.

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28994
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #26 on: 18 February 2020, 00:09:03 »
Even focus fire is going to require the IS to get into range they can hit at . . . run a Clan elite or veteran star up against two random companies using the Combat Manual series to roll it.  Bad . . . it was very bad for the IS . . .

With that said, I DO think the Nightsky was designed to fill the League, Cappie and Drac fronts to free up longer ranged designs to be transferred to the Clan front.  Clan range and pulse weapons along with their mobility just makes it too hard for the Nightsky to get into range let alone good ranges.
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25835
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #27 on: 18 February 2020, 00:53:43 »
Depends on the battlefield.  I'd hate to use it on an open plain, but in built-up terrain or forests where line of sight is more restricted it's going to be fairly effective.
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman

garhkal

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6648
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #28 on: 18 February 2020, 01:43:54 »
Or in a city and for those saying switch the LPL out for a snubby, not everyone plays in games where each player has access to all sorts of tech to switch things out.
It's not who you kill, but how they die!
You can't shoot what you can't see.
You can not dodge it if you don't know it's coming.

SteelRaven

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9597
  • Fight for something or Die for nothing
    • The Steel-Raven at DeviantArt
Re: MOT? - Nightsky
« Reply #29 on: 18 February 2020, 02:07:23 »
Why I like the PPC on the 5T, gives you options.
Battletech Art and Commissions
http://steel-raven.deviantart.com

 

Register