New MekHQ Development Release 0.3.2, now with maintenance

[Taharqa]

Get the full details at the link below. Be sure to read the details about maintenance.

http://megamek.info/node/79

[epic]

Ee-yikes.  Looks awesome but now I have to attach a tech to all my machines for maintenance... that's a lot of work for my new brigade...

[Flame_Draken]

I had some problems when I copy/pasted the new version over the older dev files but I fixed that pretty fast.

Looking through everything right now and I gotta say everything is pretty sweet except when experimenting with the new maintenance stuff on an existing force I had half my mechs rendered inoperable due to cockpit crits and most of the rest have other minor to major damage.  This seems a rather accurate portrayal of the era I'm in with the unit, tail end of the 3rd SW for the suckage.

This might explain the high payouts shown in the InOps beta rules show.  Having to pay for new parts constantly will suck money right out of a merc's pocket.

[Taharqa]

I had some problems when I copy/pasted the new version over the older dev files but I fixed that pretty fast.

Dont ever do that. Always install fresh.

Looking through everything right now and I gotta say everything is pretty sweet except when experimenting with the new maintenance stuff on an existing force I had half my mechs rendered inoperable due to cockpit crits and most of the rest have other minor to major damage.  This seems a rather accurate portrayal of the era I'm in with the unit, tail end of the 3rd SW for the suckage.

I would suggest turning off the quality mods for maintenance if playing 3SW. Otherwise your mechs will get destroyed pretty quick. You could also experiment with increasing the bonus for individual parts and/or changing the length of the cycle. If you have to make 52 checks in a year for the 3SW, all you will have left at the end is junk.

[Obvious]

You could also experiment with increasing the bonus for individual parts

How do you do this?  Is this the Maintenance Modifier (default -1)?

[epic]

Dont ever do that. Always install fresh.

I would suggest turning off the quality mods for maintenance if playing 3SW. Otherwise your mechs will get destroyed pretty quick. You could also experiment with increasing the bonus for individual parts and/or changing the length of the cycle. If you have to make 52 checks in a year for the 3SW, all you will have left at the end is junk.

I would argue for a longer maintenance cycle - about 1/month.  I'm going to tinker with the idea of per era, the maintenance cycle is different, based on the sophistication of the equipment/tech training/tech availability.

So, 1/week for SL/Clan Invasion/Jihad era.  2/month for 3039 era/maybe 2nd SW, 1/month for 3SW/4SW
Don't think I'll play age of war era, but I would guess maybe 2/month there too...

[Taharqa]

How do you do this?  Is this the Maintenance Modifier (default -1)?

Yes.

I would argue for a longer maintenance cycle - about 1/month.  I'm going to tinker with the idea of per era, the maintenance cycle is different, based on the sophistication of the equipment/tech training/tech availability.

So, 1/week for SL/Clan Invasion/Jihad era.  2/month for 3039 era/maybe 2nd SW, 1/month for 3SW/4SW
Don't think I'll play age of war era, but I would guess maybe 2/month there too...

I think one month is probably good for all eras.

[Obvious]

Looks like the quality levels all reset to D after loading a campaign.

[ralgith]

And... all refits are funked too. They'll always return IMPOSSIBLE for the target roll. I've fixed this in trunk, but just warning everyone.

[SCC]

StratOps actually sets two standards for the Maintenance cycle, for random sort of pick up play where time is NOT tracked there is one Maintenance cycle per fight. The other for when time is tracked of DAILY, yeah, it's a bad idea to do that

[Taharqa]

StratOps actually sets two standards for the Maintenance cycle, for random sort of pick up play where time is NOT tracked there is one Maintenance cycle per fight. The other for when time is tracked of DAILY, yeah, it's a bad idea to do that

Where does it say anything about daily in StratOps?

[Taharqa]

Looks like the quality levels all reset to D after loading a campaign.

Doh, I forgot to save part quality to the file. Fixed for the next release.

[Flame_Draken]

I've already reported this bug but I'll post this here so people know how to work around it.

Basically small craft on up use Tech/Vessel for maintenance but to select who does the job, it only displays aerotechs to do the job.  To work around that you need to assign at least one point of Tech/Aero skill to the crewmember doing the maintenance on the vessel you are using.

[SCC]

Where does it say anything about daily in StratOps?

Page 166, under time, here's the relevant bit

If players are tracking time across days, weeks, months and so on, then each day provides eight hours of productive work. This is referred to as the Maintenance/Repair Cycle.

[Taharqa]

Page 166, under time, here's the relevant bit

Yes, but it doesn't ever actually say that you make a maintenance check every "cycle." I actually asked about this on the old boards and got a response from RNB himself that went along the lines of "whatever works in your game."

[Peleandros]

Yes, but it doesn't ever actually say that you make a maintenance check every "cycle." I actually asked about this on the old boards and got a response from RNB himself that went along the lines of "whatever works in your game."

I'm pretty sure that "whatever works for your game" was the intended length between for maintenance rolls, which is kinda annoying. Personally I would make the checks maybe once a month, but require the work and payment weekly.

[Taharqa]

I've already reported this bug but I'll post this here so people know how to work around it.

Basically small craft on up use Tech/Vessel for maintenance but to select who does the job, it only displays aerotechs to do the job.  To work around that you need to assign at least one point of Tech/Aero skill to the crewmember doing the maintenance on the vessel you are using.

I think small craft should be Tech/Aero because they are not listed in StratOps as one of the units that are self-maintained by their crews and currently MHQ assumes that the three base crew members for small craft are all pilots.

[ralgith]

Is anyone else getting phantom (extra) parts on their units when they need to repair them or when salvaging?

[Taharqa]

Is anyone else getting phantom (extra) parts on their units when they need to repair them or when salvaging?

There was a problem with phantom "Standard" parts on the last release, but that should be fixed. What kind of phantom parts are you seeing?

[Jayof9s]

This was a variety of weapons. I first noticed it with some fighters I was salvaging parts from. They had 1 extra of some of their weapons. (i.e. I was salvaging a Kirghiz C and I noticed after I salvaged the initial UAC20, 2 LPL, ER SL, 2 ER PPC, 2 ER LL [and they were all marked off in red for the unit display] there was still a UAC20, LPL, ER SL, ER PPC and ER LL to salvage. )

And then for 'Mechs: I had a Firestarter that had 7 double heat sinks that needed removed (even though it didn't have any HS outside the engine and they couldn't be replaced once removed, despite showing as missing) and then later, a mech with 2 small lasers in an arm (and none else where) had everything repaired except those, yet it reported 3 needing replaced.

I've also noticed that at least one campaign file I'm running has been ballooning on nearly every save, despite minimal changes/unit growth (i.e. 3 mbs to 4.5, 6, 7.5, etc) it is up to 11-12 mbs now but it is far smaller than other campaigns I have that don't take up as much space.

[ralgith]

This was a variety of weapons. I first noticed it with some fighters I was salvaging parts from. They had 1 extra of some of their weapons. (i.e. I was salvaging a Kirghiz C and I noticed after I salvaged the initial UAC20, 2 LPL, ER SL, 2 ER PPC, 2 ER LL [and they were all marked off in red for the unit display] there was still a UAC20, LPL, ER SL, ER PPC and ER LL to salvage. )

And then for 'Mechs: I had a Firestarter that had 7 double heat sinks that needed removed (even though it didn't have any HS outside the engine and they couldn't be replaced once removed, despite showing as missing) and then later, a mech with 2 small lasers in an arm (and none else where) had everything repaired except those, yet it reported 3 needing replaced.

I've also noticed that at least one campaign file I'm running has been ballooning on nearly every save, despite minimal changes/unit growth (i.e. 3 mbs to 4.5, 6, 7.5, etc) it is up to 11-12 mbs now but it is far smaller than other campaigns I have that don't take up as much space.

On the Thunderbolt in question which had the phantom clan ERSL in the arm, I looked in the campaign file and there are 3 cERSL assigned 2 it, and 2 of them are assigned to the same slot. I just can't see where they could be coming from. And this is something relatively new.

[SCC]

Yes, but it doesn't ever actually say that you make a maintenance check every "cycle." I actually asked about this on the old boards and got a response from RNB himself that went along the lines of "whatever works in your game."

Good catch, but I noticed something else when going over the rules to confirm and noticed something on page 169

Between each game in an ongoing campaign, the Technical Team assigned to each active unit [...] must make a Maintenance Check.

A unit needs maintenance strictly once per fight

[Taharqa]

Good catch, but I noticed something else when going over the rules to confirm and noticed something on page 169A unit needs maintenance strictly once per fight

Yes, which is why I asked a question about it, because that approach is pretty worthless, IMHO. Its also one that is never going to happen in MHQ. So instead we are honoring the "whatever works in your game" rule by allowing users to pick whatever cycle they want.

[epic]

This was a variety of weapons. I first noticed it with some fighters I was salvaging parts from. They had 1 extra of some of their weapons. (i.e. I was salvaging a Kirghiz C and I noticed after I salvaged the initial UAC20, 2 LPL, ER SL, 2 ER PPC, 2 ER LL [and they were all marked off in red for the unit display] there was still a UAC20, LPL, ER SL, ER PPC and ER LL to salvage. )

And then for 'Mechs: I had a Firestarter that had 7 double heat sinks that needed removed (even though it didn't have any HS outside the engine and they couldn't be replaced once removed, despite showing as missing) and then later, a mech with 2 small lasers in an arm (and none else where) had everything repaired except those, yet it reported 3 needing replaced.

I've also noticed that at least one campaign file I'm running has been ballooning on nearly every save, despite minimal changes/unit growth (i.e. 3 mbs to 4.5, 6, 7.5, etc) it is up to 11-12 mbs now but it is far smaller than other campaigns I have that don't take up as much space.

Yeah, I had this happen too... accidentally salvaged 19 cER Medium Lasers from a Black Hawk Prime before thinking... gee, that was way too many lasers. 

[epic]

If I may make a suggestion for those few of you like me that having extremely large forces? 

Don't use maintenance.  While I appreciate it, devs, and I really want to use it... the amount of repairs it generates when dealing with a sizable force becomes a massive headache.

I suppose I could alter the difficulty roll to make it really easy and change the amount of checks to be only 1/mo or something, and only fail on 2's, but even then... that is a LOT of parts when you're talking about 2 regiments worth of troops. 

For smaller units, it's great, no arguments.  Can keep up with the repairs easily enough.  For overly large, I think I'll just pay a heightened amount of maintenance and call it done - which I've already been doing.  (using IO maintenance rules, but F:Mercs income on contracts - which means, unless I keep taking combat missions, and getting loot, my maintenance costs are higher than my income).  Keeps the forces hungry for missions, and the carrot being dangled of getting a title and land to afford the cost of maintenance. 

[Davout73]

If there were some way to automate the rolls, that would be helpful.  As in, assign a tech to all repair tasks, roll, assign a new tech to tasks that failed, roll...Maybe split maintenance rolls into its own log?


Dav

If I may make a suggestion for those few of you like me that having extremely large forces? 

Don't use maintenance.  While I appreciate it, devs, and I really want to use it... the amount of repairs it generates when dealing with a sizable force becomes a massive headache.

I suppose I could alter the difficulty roll to make it really easy and change the amount of checks to be only 1/mo or something, and only fail on 2's, but even then... that is a LOT of parts when you're talking about 2 regiments worth of troops. 

For smaller units, it's great, no arguments.  Can keep up with the repairs easily enough.  For overly large, I think I'll just pay a heightened amount of maintenance and call it done - which I've already been doing.  (using IO maintenance rules, but F:Mercs income on contracts - which means, unless I keep taking combat missions, and getting loot, my maintenance costs are higher than my income).  Keeps the forces hungry for missions, and the carrot being dangled of getting a title and land to afford the cost of maintenance.

[Sir Chaos]

If there were some way to automate the rolls, that would be helpful.  As in, assign a tech to all repair tasks, roll, assign a new tech to tasks that failed, roll...Maybe split maintenance rolls into its own log?


Dav

In conjunction with Taharqa´s custom repair rule, where no minimum skill levels are needed for repairs, this automation could simply be that the tech which is assigned to maintain a unit automatically handles all the repairs from maintenance failures.

[epic]

In conjunction with Taharqa´s custom repair rule, where no minimum skill levels are needed for repairs, this automation could simply be that the tech which is assigned to maintain a unit automatically handles all the repairs from maintenance failures.

That would be great... but they would also have to set it for amount of time spent on the repair (ie; would it be x4, or rush job?).

After running one maintenance check, I had ... hmmm... a couple hundred parts needing repairs.  Some of that would require multiple techs to fix within a day.

However, I WILL say... this will probably be AWESOME for a 3sw campaign, setting the stage for mechs breaking down with parts in rough shape...

[Jayof9s]

For overly large, I think I'll just pay a heightened amount of maintenance and call it done - which I've already been doing.  (using IO maintenance rules, but F:Mercs income on contracts - which means, unless I keep taking combat missions, and getting loot, my maintenance costs are higher than my income).  Keeps the forces hungry for missions, and the carrot being dangled of getting a title and land to afford the cost of maintenance.

Too bad right now turning off Maintenance Checks apparently turns off Maintenance Costs too.  ::)

We just got that fixed, but I assume it was present in 0.3.2 since it was still present in the newer dev build so I figured I'd give everyone a heads up.

[Davout73]

In conjunction with Taharqa´s custom repair rule, where no minimum skill levels are needed for repairs, this automation could simply be that the tech which is assigned to maintain a unit automatically handles all the repairs from maintenance failures.

I think that would be very nice.  There could be some issues with some sub rules depending on what you've chosen.  As much as I hate to say it, a window that pops up with a summary of each roll for each mech would probably be best, but I have no idea what sort of coding would be involved.

Dav