A What if Regarding Lasers...

[majesticmoose]

EDIT *I'm more interested in the outcome of this change to the rules set especially if it had been this way from the get go rather than an actual rule change.  this is not a rule change I'm proposing, but a hypothetical thing of curiosity. And in a galaxy so close yet so far, in a universe of prolific cold fusion, I wasn't too worried about the actual physics of the whole thing, but simply thinking of a different way to model light speed weapons.*

What if Lasers had been originally designed so that their entire range bracket was short range, and their overall ranges were reduced to compensate?  The in universe reason (and kinda realistic reason) is that lasers are speed of light weapons.  in the realm of ground combat,  you point and click.  range means little, so it's essentially about intervening terrain and how well you can line up your shot.  Clearly it would change the shape of the game, but do you think this would have shaped the in universe designs significantly?

Would we see fewer/more flashbulb designs?

Would this encourage/discourage speedy knife fighting mechs?

Would this be a kind of change that would make AC's relevant in the 3025 era?

If this were the case, should PPCs follow suit, or are they distinct enough to retain their own standard brackets?

With Clan level tech, does this "what if" produce results far too powerful?  if so, how do you think the clan tech lasers might have been developed differently?

to be clear this "what if" would result in lasers having the exact same weapon profile, but with the following range changes.  again, all ranges would be short ranges (and due to beam diffusion, the weapons simply can't damage things past this range).  Pulse lasers would become cluster fire weapons in this instance, and retain their AP properties, like LBX style lasers.

IS
Small -2 hex
medium - 5 hex
Large - 8 hex
ERsmall - 3 hex
ER Medium - 6 (7?)
ER Large - 10

Clan
ER Small - 3 hex
ER Med - 8 hex
ER Large - 13 hex

[evilauthor]

You'd need to explain why your lasers just flat stop being able to hit anything once you get outside their "short" range bracket.

Attenuation? In that case, your laser damage should be DROPPING as the range opens up, not just getting flat cut off. The idea does present the notion that the canon lasers instead of accruing TN penalties in the Medium and Long Range brackets, their damage drops dramatically.

Alternatively, you need to hold the laser on the target for a non-zero amount of time before any actual damage is done (see any MWO video to see how this would look). But that can be represented by standard TN rolls.

[majesticmoose]

You'd need to explain why your lasers just flat stop being able to hit anything once you get outside their "short" range bracket.

Attenuation? In that case, your laser damage should be DROPPING as the range opens up, not just getting flat cut off. The idea does present the notion that the canon lasers instead of accruing TN penalties in the Medium and Long Range brackets, their damage drops dramatically.

Alternatively, you need to hold the laser on the target for a non-zero amount of time before any actual damage is done (see any MWO video to see how this would look). But that can be represented by standard TN rolls.

I was more interested in the outcome of this change to the rules set especially if it had been this way from the get go rather than an actual rule change.  this is not a rule change I'm proposing, but a hypothetical thing of curiosity. And in a galaxy so close yet so far, in a universe of prolific cold fusion, I wasn't too worried about the actual physics of the whole thing, but simply thinking of a different way to model light speed weapons.

Attenuation is fine as an explanation.  But I feel like in this explanation there is a "critical mass" of energy transfer that drops off at x range.  say for instance that to actually damage the armor you have to exceed a certain energy.

take a pot of water as an example.  if the pot was 20 degrees Celsius and it has a cooling system that reduces it's temperature back to 20 degrees Celsius after 6 seconds. you have a laser that can deliver x amount of energy to this pot of water, enough to raise the water to boiling with excess energy to spare, and you can fire this laser every 6 seconds. 

However after say 150 meters the atmosphere plus gradual beam diffusion/dispersal/attenuation lowers the practical amount of energy delivered to the water so that it only reach 90 degrees, or 80 degrees Celsius.  That's still impressive, but not nearly as effective from an evaporation standpoint as raising the water temp above 100.  the effect then  of the weapon would be not only reduced, but effectively nuetralized, since you can't over come the cooling system.

Applied to mech armor, the honey comb and somewhat composit nature of the armor means that you have to deliver enough energy in a single burst to actual sublimate the materials or cause a significant thermal stress or what have you.  but past X range the energy delivered in a once per 5 or 10 second firing rate isn't enough to pass that critical activation-energy/sublimation point/actual structural damage to the plating.  so to reflect this the drop off essentially reflects that unique state of 31st century armor.

[CloaknDagger]

However after say 150 meters the atmosphere plus gradual beam diffusion/dispersal/attenuation lowers the practical amount of energy delivered to the water so that it only reach 90 degrees, or 80 degrees Celsius.  That's still impressive, but not nearly as effective from an evaporation standpoint as raising the water temp above 100.  the effect then  of the weapon would be not only reduced, but effectively nuetralized, since you can't over come the cooling system.

Applied to mech armor, the honey comb and somewhat composit nature of the armor means that you have to deliver enough energy in a single burst to actual sublimate the materials or cause a significant thermal stress or what have you.  but past X range the energy delivered in a once per 5 or 10 second firing rate isn't enough to pass that critical activation-energy/sublimation point/actual structural damage to the plating.  so to reflect this the drop off essentially reflects that unique state of 31st century armor.

There's no magic line where a real laser stops doing damage. It would make more sense for the damage to just decrease over range, with no to hit modifiers.

EG:

Large Laser

8 Damage to 5 hexes.

5 Damage to 10 hexes.

3 Damage to 15 hexes.

Medium Laser

5 Damage to 3 hexes

3 Damage to 6 hexes

1 Damage to 9 hexes.

Small Laser

3 Damage to 1 hex.

2 Damage to 2 hexes.

1 Damage to 3 Hexes.

[majesticmoose]

There's no magic line where a real laser stops doing damage. It would make more sense for the damage to just decrease over range, with no to hit modifiers.

EG:

Large Laser

8 Damage to 5 hexes.

5 Damage to 10 hexes.

3 Damage to 15 hexes.

Medium Laser

5 Damage to 3 hexes

3 Damage to 6 hexes

1 Damage to 9 hexes.

Small Laser

3 Damage to 1 hex.

2 Damage to 2 hexes.

3 Damage to 3 Hexes.

Cool.  thanks for not engaging the question but simply saying, "nah.  it doesn't work, because it's not real science."  Like HPGs and Kearney-fuchida and all the reasons I just pointed out above.

I understand beam attenuation and actual electromagnetic physics.  I've read tac-ops and I have seen optional rules for adjusting laser damage based on range.  that's not what I was trying to discuss.

It's like trying to damage a high elasticity metal with a big rubber mallet.  you might be able to do it, but unlikely that any one single hit will work.  I'm simply presenting a "what if" that because standard and all other Btech armors are made with "magic ablative flubber" that EM hits below a certain magnitude fail to actual cause any real structural damage, and thus beam attenuation and diffusion are not slow drop offs, but all or nothing.

And the topic I was TRYING to engage is the idea that light speed weapons (lasers being the most obvious kind) would be much less prone to a lead and fire strategy, so the range of the target would matter less if at all for actual to-hit purposes.

I love the logical fallacy that a laser can't possibly do NO damage after 150 meters, but after 270 meters, of course it would do NO damage (like the way the game is written now).

[CloaknDagger]

It's like trying to damage a high elasticity metal with a big rubber mallet.  you might be able to do it, but unlikely that any one single hit will work.  I'm simply presenting a "what if" that because standard and all other Btech armors are made with "magic ablative flubber" that EM hits below a certain magnitude fail to actual cause any real structural damage, and thus beam attenuation and diffusion are not slow drop offs, but all or nothing.

I love the logical fallacy that a laser can't possibly do NO damage after 150 meters, but after 270 meters, of course it would do NO damage (like the way the game is written now).

I wouldn't mind seeing the range brackets expanded on even more than that, but you run a bit into too many numbers for TT. (But not MM  ;))

EG.

Large Laser

8D to 5H.
7D to 6/7H.
6D to 8/9H
5D to 10/11H.
4D to 12/13H.
3D to 15/17H.
2D to 18/20H.
1D to LoS.

[HazMeat]

My first thought is that the Snubbie's effect on the game when it is available might be a good place to look for insight.  I dunno what that says, but I did have second and third thoughts as well... 

As for whether PPC are treated the same way...  "Realistically" speaking, they're close enough to light speed that on ground combat scales they'd might as well be lasers at least in that point-and-click sense.  For me, "Rule of Cool" agrees, but judging from video game depictions I'm in a minority.  For me, it also says minimum ranges are a good mechanic, so my preference would be to not treat PPC the same way.  Moose' world's standard PPC would be more like a weaker version of our Snubbie, and I think I'd still like it plenty, but I think I like the minimum range mechanic more.  Speaking of that, do people like to bracket Snubbies with LRMs? 

Hm.  Most bracket setups might seem to be mostly using the laser's short band, but even for players who religiously avoid overheating there's still the value of having at least their more modest long range to fall back on when the LRMs are spent or critted out or whatever.  Occasional ambiguity as to which battery is better use of heat capacity just looks like a bonus of added flexibility, which might about balance out with the hypothetical alternative of having the optimum ranges overlap a bit- except for the aforementioned religionists, of course.  If Moose' stats were used instead, ML+LRM might not look so hot, but LL+LRM might be pretty similar in effectiveness to how we know it. 

This is kinda running off on a tangent, but I think I would have better liked if all the lasers were split into long- and short- range versions, kinda like LRMs and SRMs.  (Just say adaptive optics aren't as effective, so the weapon needs a narrower "home" range for focal depth.)  In addition to the short-ranged lasers, there would be long-ranged versions with heavy minimum ranges like LRMs have.  Wandering farther off-topic, I think that would be one of several nice mechanics to use in such "what if" speculation on what could have made for a different game- stuff like "magazines and Gauss Rifles fail safe when damaged, and the very impressive energy storage systems of compact, lightweight beam weapons are dangerously volatile" instead.  If you want something that's compact, nonvolatile, and hot-running, (so more of its mass and bulk is crit-padding, bracket-sharable heat sinks) it is gonna have ammo limitations and weird ranges so it takes at least a wee bit of thought to cheese. 

[ialdabaoth]

There's no magic line where a real laser stops doing damage. It would make more sense for the damage to just decrease over range, with no to hit modifiers.

EG:

Large Laser

8 Damage to 5 hexes.

5 Damage to 10 hexes.

3 Damage to 15 hexes.

Medium Laser

5 Damage to 3 hexes

3 Damage to 6 hexes

1 Damage to 9 hexes.

Small Laser

3 Damage to 1 hex.

2 Damage to 2 hexes.

1 Damage to 3 Hexes.

This is probably the best solution (although I'd have the Medium Laser deal 2 damage from 7-9 hexes, rather than 1, and I might increase the range of the Small Laser to 1-2/3-4/5-6).

[Orion]

In my slowly developing alternate ruleset, I define lasers with damage and attenuation values.  The given damage is at point blank range, and goes down by one for every attenuation worth of hexes.  Because they don't have range modifiers to hit, I don't worry about what is short, medium, long etc.  So for me, lasers do not differ so much by initial damage, but in attenuation value.  That is, all mech-mounted lasers do about the same value damage, but heavier and/or newer models tend to have better range.

In my view, lasers would take over as the primary weapons unless they either had long recharge times and/or did much less damage than other weapons.  And because I do want other weapons in the game, I implement both these.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

You'd need to explain why your lasers just flat stop being able to hit anything once you get outside their "short" range bracket.

Not necessarily.

You could say that the armor of the battletech universe is sufficiently tough that the little diffusion the laser suffers at the end of the arbitrarily-chosen range bracket is enough to make the laser unable to do more than gently heat the armor patch for no damage.

You might even say that's the way it works in the canon rules, since lasers go from full damage to no damage in a space of <30 meters.

[CloaknDagger]

Not necessarily.

You could say that the armor of the battletech universe is sufficiently tough that the little diffusion the laser suffers at the end of the arbitrarily-chosen range bracket is enough to make the laser unable to do more than gently heat the armor patch for no damage.

You might even say that's the way it works in the canon rules, since lasers go from full damage to no damage in a space of <30 meters.

Except they don't. They do damage out to LoS, if you can hit with them.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

LOS rules and range brackets are apples and oranges.

But if you want to go there, I'll say it STILL has a <30 meter dropoff to nil when the target is 1 hex off the playing area.

If you're trying to say that range brackets are more of a representation of the targeting and tracking sensors dedicated to various weapons than the weapons themselves, then yes I'd actually agree with that. 

[CloaknDagger]

LOS rules and range brackets are apples and oranges.

But if you want to go there, I'll say it STILL has a <30 meter dropoff to nil when the target is 1 hex off the playing area.

If you're trying to say that range brackets are more of a representation of the targeting and tracking sensors dedicated to various weapons than the weapons themselves, then yes I'd actually agree with that.

That's because it's both. It's just an abstraction becasue do you really want to look at this table:

Large Laser

8D to 5H.
7D to 6/7H.
6D to 8/9H
5D to 10/11H.
4D to 12/13H.
3D to 15/17H.
2D to 18/20H.
1D to LoS.

Expect with fractional damages, and hexes numbers extended to 100?

No, that would be a pain. So we have extreme and LoS rules instead.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

This is going well off track.  It's not a discussion about LOS/Extreme rules.

[CloaknDagger]

This is going well off track.  It's not a discussion about LOS/Extreme rules.

The OP question has already been answered: Laser/Gauss everywhere. Now we're moving on to more laser discussion.

[majesticmoose]

The OP question has already been answered: Laser/Gauss everywhere. Now we're moving on to more laser discussion.

No, actually my original question was no where near answered. Instead certain people felt like making a big issue about how it wasn't "possible", and ignored all my questions about the impact of the changed paradigm, as well as ignored my attempts to get back to my original post.

So no, my original question has been remarkably UNanswered. I simply gave up trying, since apparently no one seemed to find the idea interesting on an abstract level.

[CloaknDagger]

No, actually my original question was no where near answered. Instead certain people felt like making a big issue about how it wasn't "possible", and ignored all my questions about the impact of the changed paradigm, as well as ignored my attempts to get back to my original post.

So no, my original question has been remarkably UNanswered. I simply gave up trying, since apparently no one seemed to find the idea interesting on an abstract level.

Like I said, Laser/Gauss or laser/missile everywhere. Basically anything at close ranges instantly dies with the numbers in the OP.

[majesticmoose]

Like I said, Laser/Gauss or laser/missile everywhere. Basically anything at close ranges instantly dies with the numbers in the OP.

First off, how are you design paradigms of laser/gauss and laser/missile and different than designs now?

Secondly, part of the original post was remobing lasers from long range combat. Especially in 3025, I feel like medium lasers change quite a bit. Jump capable assaults with ACs , especially 5s and 10s become very different, since they have much larger effective ranges.

And there were several questions above. I posited that pulse wouldn't have a bonus to hit but might become a rapid fire weapon.

Most of all, this isn't an actual proposed rule change but simply a thought on how the game could have been represented. So discussing alternative representations of laser diffusion is off topic, and a little rude.

[CloaknDagger]

First off, how are you design paradigms of laser/gauss and laser/missile and different than designs now?

Secondly, part of the original post was remobing lasers from long range combat. Especially in 3025, I feel like medium lasers change quite a bit. Jump capable assaults with ACs , especially 5s and 10s become very different, since they have much larger effective ranges.

Laser Gauss now is just about mixing weapon systems, one heat making, one not. Laser missile is about mixing the long range power of energy weapons with SRMs at short range for firepower there using the extra heat.

The problem here is that energy weapons are way better than SRMs. A 3 ton SRM 6 does 12 damage for 4 heat. But here, an ER Medium laser does 5 damage for 5 heat and 1 ton, to a range a 7. The problem is that the -2 bonus on the SRM means you can pretty much not worry about overheat, because you will instakill your target if you have enough of them, since you won't miss.

[majesticmoose]

Laser Gauss now is just about mixing weapon systems, one heat making, one not. Laser missile is about mixing the long range power of energy weapons with SRMs at short range for firepower there using the extra heat.

The problem here is that energy weapons are way better than SRMs. A 3 ton SRM 6 does 12 damage for 4 heat. But here, an ER Medium laser does 5 damage for 5 heat and 1 ton, to a range a 7. The problem is that the -2 bonus on the SRM means you can pretty much not worry about overheat, because you will instakill your target if you have enough of them, since you won't miss.

?

That's a gross oversimplification. It may be the case with a large laser, but those aren't quite the same class of weapon.

First off, SRMs are there for versatility and crit seeking. This change doesn't change that. Secondly, compared to a medium laser these kinds if changes would give a ML an advantage at 4 and 5 hexes, no advantage at 1-3, and MLs would have no capacity past 5, giving SRMs the advantage.

If you're referring to a Large Laser, SRMs aren't really a good comparison weapon because they've always been intended to fill different roles. However, comparing a Large Laser to an AC 5 it again becomes a scenario where the AC 5 has significant range advantages, while the laser has that 2 hex sweet spot, which is basically the same as a snub nose PPC.

So you're agruement is not supported, as this does no more or less to break the game than a clan ERML did to the traditional board game and the snub nose did to all jihad and post jihad designs.

Now, if your comment is that laser/missile designs would invert, using LRMs and lasers as bracket fire then that's interesting. A 5 hex ML short range would perfectly cover an LRM, and that would be an even more common sight. What do you see a LL role would be, as it would be a dancing weapon similar to a snub nose?

[CloaknDagger]

Now, if your comment is that laser/missile designs would invert, using LRMs and lasers as bracket fire then that's interesting. A 5 hex ML short range would perfectly cover an LRM, and that would be an even more common sight. What do you see a LL role would be, as it would be a dancing weapon similar to a snub nose?

Yeah, except the Snubbie does the job far better. The snubbie would make the large ones obsolete.

[majesticmoose]

Yeah, except the Snubbie does the job far better. The snubbie would make the large ones obsolete.

So your agruement is:

A.) the theoretical change to lasers would make them to accurate and good, negating most all short range weapons.

B.) this would result in designs featuring only lasers and long range weapons.

C.) the snub nose already enacts this style of gameplay and better accomplishes it better.

QED: the snub nose is obviously too good and will forever dominate short range weaponry.

Do I have that right?  Because the empirical evidence of designs and game play do not agree with your agruement.

[CloaknDagger]

So your agruement is:

A.) the theoretical change to lasers would make them to accurate and good, negating most all short range weapons.

B.) this would result in designs featuring only lasers and long range weapons.

C.) the snub nose already enacts this style of gameplay and better accomplishes it better.

QED: the snub nose is obviously too good and will forever dominate short range weaponry.

Do I have that right?  Because the empirical evidence of designs and game play do not agree with your agruement.

The snubbie does well compared to the large lasers.

But, as always, the large lasers are nothing compared to the mediums.

It would be medium laser spam all the time, everywhere. Snubbies and larges wouldn't be able to compete with their light weight.

It's like the intro tech design of nothing but LRMs and Medium Lasers, except you just made the medium lasers better.

The only point of a larger weapon would be hole punching, so the difference is that a heavier design would pack an extra snubbie with a capacitor.

[majesticmoose]

The snubbie does well compared to the large lasers.

But, as always, the large lasers are nothing compared to the mediums.

It would be medium laser spam all the time, everywhere. Snubbies and larges wouldn't be able to compete with their light weight.

It's like the intro tech design of nothing but LRMs and Medium Lasers, except you just made the medium lasers better.

The only point of a larger weapon would be hole punching, so the difference is that a heavier design would pack an extra snubbie with a capacitor.

But the medium laser would suffer from the exact same issues that an IS pulse does now. The weight may help, but in the end a 5 hex max range is really limiting. Think of that heavy Combine BA, with 15 armor ( I can remember its stats just not its name. Go figure) That BA is now dramatically different in terms of what field of fire it can muster.

The problem with your agruement is that plenty of weapons have come along that partially or effectively accomplish some of what I'm talking about. However, they haven't broken the game. In fact they've barely changed it. The snub is the most obvious one.

Despite there being archers and catapults ( intros with LRMs and MLs) there are also a host of other designs and they would be impacted as well. Take the wasp for instance, or the locust. Even a rifleman. The strategies change. On the rifleman now the lasers alpha at a different position, and the AC 5s have a much more expanded role in the fight.

You have yet to explain how this completely up ends the entire weapon balance simply because MLs would bracket fire slightly better.

[CloaknDagger]

But the medium laser would suffer from the exact same issues that an IS pulse does now. The weight may help, but in the end a 5 hex max range is really limiting. Think of that heavy Combine BA, with 15 armor ( I can remember its stats just not its name. Go figure) That BA is now dramatically different in terms of what field of fire it can muster.

Eh, BA are another territory completely. But even then, AP/Magshot Gauss and LRMs are good enough for them to be essentially the same even with lasers removed, so I'm not getting into that.

The problem with your agruement is that plenty of weapons have come along that partially or effectively accomplish some of what I'm talking about. However, they haven't broken the game. In fact they've barely changed it. The snub is the most obvious one.

Despite there being archers and catapults ( intros with LRMs and MLs) there are also a host of other designs and they would be impacted as well. Take the wasp for instance, or the locust. Even a rifleman. The strategies change. On the rifleman now the lasers alpha at a different position, and the AC 5s have a much more expanded role in the fight.

You have yet to explain how this completely up ends the entire weapon balance simply because MLs would bracket fire slightly better.

Like I said, medium lasers are a COMPLETELY different think than a snubbie. Even compared to medium pulse lasers, the difference is that these ones weigh less, so you can do MUCH more damage per ton.

1 ton medium lasers means you can have THREE instead of an SRM6. That means 15 damage with no to hit modifier up to range 5, versus AT MOST 12 damage (which is also vulnerable to AMS) that past range 3 has +2 to hit. The +4 at long range is bad enough accuracy to be pretty much negligible.

Your example with the rifleman highlights what I meant with the introtech favoring only Mediums and LRMs. As you know, AC5s are garbage. An LRM5 is a fourth of the weight and gets an extra ~25% ammo per ton. And when you take into account greater range, it does roughly the same damage.

Put simply, the LRM is the king of introtech weapons for range. It's weakest point, close range, is covered by the medium laser, the premier close range weapon.

Together, there's no real reason to have any other weapon, save for perhaps a single PPC for hole punching, and an AC20 for specialist designs made solely for urban combat, but that can pretty much be ignored.

[majesticmoose]

Eh, BA are another territory completely. But even then, AP/Magshot Gauss and LRMs are good enough for them to be essentially the same even with lasers removed, so I'm not getting into that.

right... it'd be a shame to have to discuss something outside a very narrow box.

Like I said, medium lasers are a COMPLETELY different think than a snubbie. Even compared to medium pulse lasers, the difference is that these ones weigh less, so you can do MUCH more damage per ton.

1 ton medium lasers means you can have THREE instead of an SRM6. That means 15 damage with no to hit modifier up to range 5, versus AT MOST 12 damage (which is also vulnerable to AMS) that past range 3 has +2 to hit. The +4 at long range is bad enough accuracy to be pretty much negligible.

Your example with the rifleman highlights what I meant with the introtech favoring only Mediums and LRMs. As you know, AC5s are garbage. An LRM5 is a fourth of the weight and gets an extra ~25% ammo per ton. And when you take into account greater range, it does roughly the same damage.

Put simply, the LRM is the king of introtech weapons for range. It's weakest point, close range, is covered by the medium laser, the premier close range weapon.

Together, there's no real reason to have any other weapon, save for perhaps a single PPC for hole punching, and an AC20 for specialist designs made solely for urban combat, but that can pretty much be ignored.

first of all, you can't just ignore everythign that is subpar and say "X doesn't work" because there are better things in the game.  iATMs and cERMLs are pretty much the best tech every on a damage per ton and range and versatility and crit basis.  they are the best.  And yet, somehow people make custom designs that aren't various combinations of those techs. 

Your example above is baseless because you are comparing 3-4 MLs to an SRM 6, and saying that the MLs are brokenly good.  and yeah, MLs are good.  They are more efficient than an SRM 6 in a vacuum.  but what I'm saying is that the change to something like this does little to skew the balance any further, since the cons are steep.

Secondly, your example of 3-4 MLs versus an SRM 6 is flawed BECAUSE you build it in a vacuum.  Especially in intro tech an ML isn't as good as you claim.  it's good, but not awesome!

Let's take a modified Pheonix hawk.  And a Griffon.  give the pheonix hawk all the MLs it can carry (a large laser, 2 medium lasers and 2 MG wth a ton of ammo is standard, so that's 9).  Cool, you have 9 medium-low heat blasting cannons.    But the griffin has a PPC and LRM 10.  The Griffin has a great range advantage over the hawk, and has almost the same movement mod.  and by the time you close to 5 hexes you'll have taken multiple turns worth of fire from the griffin.  Of course, you could equip the hawk with 2 LRM 5s and a ton of ammo just to be cheap, but then you're either dancing at range against an opponent with superior long range firepower, or yoou're again closing with less short range power.

Plus if you alpha with 9 MLs in 3025 tech, you will likely overheat in a bad way.  3x9 + 6 heat for jumping = 33 heat.  That's possible shut down.  The griffin on the other hand can jump full and fire all and only build up 7 heat, and can vent most of that in the next turn. 

Now of course these aren't riflemen, but the medium range on the AC5s is meaningful versus a hawk as it closes, and the heat problems involved with MLs will prevent you from being so terrifying.

Again, this change does little to make an ML more or less powerful, as the MLPlaser does almost exactly the same thing, and while it weighs more it's not a significant difference.  I just feel like you are oversimplifying the situation and not thinking on a broader tactical level.

[CloaknDagger]

right... it'd be a shame to have to discuss something outside a very narrow box.

first of all, you can't just ignore everythign that is subpar and say "X doesn't work" because there are better things in the game.  iATMs and cERMLs are pretty much the best tech every on a damage per ton and range and versatility and crit basis.  they are the best.  And yet, somehow people make custom designs that aren't various combinations of those techs. 

iATMs are what you should spam when you have available. In fact, a good Clan Vee is iATMs and a pair of CERMLs.

But, as iATMs aren't always available, sometimes you fit in a CERPPC or CLRMs.

Secondly, your example of 3-4 MLs versus an SRM 6 is flawed BECAUSE you build it in a vacuum.  Especially in intro tech an ML isn't as good as you claim.  it's good, but not awesome!

Let's take a modified Pheonix hawk.  And a Griffon.  give the pheonix hawk all the MLs it can carry (a large laser, 2 medium lasers and 2 MG wth a ton of ammo is standard, so that's 9).  Cool, you have 9 medium-low heat blasting cannons.    But the griffin has a PPC and LRM 10.  The Griffin has a great range advantage over the hawk, and has almost the same movement mod.  and by the time you close to 5 hexes you'll have taken multiple turns worth of fire from the griffin.  Of course, you could equip the hawk with 2 LRM 5s and a ton of ammo just to be cheap, but then you're either dancing at range against an opponent with superior long range firepower, or yoou're again closing with less short range power.

A Griffin seems like a good example. For the same mech, I can have 4xLRM5s, two tons of ammo, 3 medium lasers, and everything else the same. the 4xLRM5s are pretty much identical to the LRM10 + PPC. Yes, the 2xLRM5 won't hit as hard, but because of range modifiers they'll hit more, and they have the potential to hit at longer ranges. Now, getting closer, I go from a single PPC to 3 Medium Lasers. That's 9 heat vs 10, which is important, because the griffin overheats 1 with jjs. So, like I said, LRMs and MLs is perfect for intro tech.

Again, this change does little to make an ML more or less powerful, as the MLPlaser does almost exactly the same thing, and while it weighs more it's not a significant difference.  I just feel like you are oversimplifying the situation and not thinking on a broader tactical level.

The MPL is TWICE as heavy, and much less heat efficient/lower ranged (Regular/ER). The weight is a huge issue.

[HazMeat]

Pardon me for trying to rerail your conversation, but I think Moose' hypothetical lasers look a bit better in terms of not competing so closely with other systems.  At very least, "in a vacuum," specifically battlemechs and Intro tech, the SRM-6 and ML seem to be stepping on each other's toes due to identical ranges.  A single SRM-6 with one ton of ammo and four heat sinks adds up to 8 tons and 7 crits, while a pair of ML with six heat sinks adds up to 8 tons and 8 crits.  This allows the 5:4 expected damage ratio, greater durability and lack of ammo limitation of the laser option to look like a larger advantage over the SRMs' greater critseeking/headseeking power, while if the Lasers had different range bands there'd be more reason to choose the SRMs for a 'mech.  This happens to be one of the closest alignments in mounting costs I'm aware of, but similar benefits would apply for AC/10 vs LL and AC/5 vs. PPC. 

As for tonnage, when including DHS (since we're talking renaissance weapons now) I'm seeing 5 MPL vs. 8 ML, and 7 MPL vs. 8 ERML.  Laser-for-laser, I agree with CnD re: standards but not ER.  On one hand, more heat sinks means more savings from bracket fire, but the ERML's strength over the MPL is mostly in the outer bands where it's only used as an overheat weapon- to really leverage that, you need give up the savings from heat sink sharing by buying more heat sinks to bring the overheat down.  The MPL probably has a psychological edge since a battery of pulse lasers that can take a head off with two hits is probably a bit more menacing than a battery of ER lasers that takes 3 hits to do that.  Er, where the heck am I going? 

Moose' differently-attenuating lasers look nice for more efficiently covering minimums and doing the hyper-specialised CQB thing, IMO.  I kinda like that, simply because they're more different from SRMs and AC than the existing lasers are, and I think it would make AC and missiles more desirable in general since lasers would not be competing so hard for their jobs, but rather doing a big part of what Pulse Lasers are supposed to be doing. 

[ialdabaoth]

I really think the snub-nosed PPC template is the ideal way to handle it, with lasers receiving no to-hit penalties at range, but receiving damage reduction instead. CloaknDagger's stats were almost perfect; I'd adjust them slightly to the following:

Large Laser - 8/5/3 damage, 6 heat, 5/10/15 range, 5 tons, 2 crits
Medium Laser - 5/3/2 damage, 3 heat, 3/6/9 range, 1 ton, 1 crit
Small Laser - 3/2/1 damage, 1 heat, 2/4/6 range, 0.5 tons, 1 crit

ER Large Laser - 8/6/4 damage, 12 heat, 7/14/21 range, 5 tons, 2 crits
ER Medium Laser - 5/4/3 damage, 5 heat, 4/8/12 range, 1 ton, 1 crit
ER Small Laser - 3/2/1 damage, 2 heat, 3/6/9 range, 0.5 tons, 1 crit

Large Pulse Laser - 9/6/3 damage, 9 heat, 4/8/12 range, 7 tons, 2 crits
Medium Pulse Laser - 6/4/2 damage, 4 heat, 2/4/6 range, 2 tons, 1 crit
Small Pulse Laser - 4/2/1 damage, 2 heat, 1/2/3 range, 1 ton, 1 crit