Author Topic: A question of maintenance  (Read 4608 times)

Thomasmarik

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 31
A question of maintenance
« on: 24 July 2014, 13:24:21 »
How do you guys handle Maintenance.  I am finding it incredibly frustrating.   When I turn it on I usually have my entire mech company crippled by the time we actually get to the mission site.  MY techs do way more damage to my units than the enemy does.

I like the idea of it I am just finding the implementation to be lacking.   I have ideas on how to do it different but I have no way to program it in.   If I came up with alternate Maintenance rules and posted them up here would it be possible to implement them as an optional unofficial rule?

ralgith

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2251
    • Dylan's BattleTech Emporium
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #1 on: 24 July 2014, 13:36:58 »
I just change the modifier so that the rolls aren't quote so insane. Which is why MHQ includes the option to change the modifier.

Thomasmarik

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #2 on: 24 July 2014, 13:41:32 »
I did that as well but I am having difficulty finding a happy medium.   It either cripples the mechs or it puts them all in pristine E condition.

That is kinda what I am wanting to address really.   I don't like that it breaks the parts.  To me if I fail the check the condition of the part should get worse.   Once it is down to A then it might break.  This would give me time to see what parts on my mechs are starting to go bad and be ready with replacement parts if necessary.    It would also be nice if this change was added to have the ability to simply swap out old parts for new ones.  Sort of a preventive maintenance type thing.

pheonixstorm

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5548
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #3 on: 24 July 2014, 14:25:43 »
HQ follows the Advanced maintenance rules found in Strategic Operations.

Jayof9s

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2419
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #4 on: 24 July 2014, 16:26:56 »
I just use the percentage based maintenance cost and turn off the maintenance rolls. I don't like the maintenance system from SO and modified the rolls are either made so easy they never fail and all of your units get to E rating or the damage is higher than some actual fights and your 'Mechs are falling to A rating within a year or two.

I still assign techs to maintain the units and then just assume the higher costs in % based cover the cost of routine replacements, etc that should go into maintenance.

You do lose the shifting quality ratings for units, but since MHQ doesn't have overhauls implemented, there's nothing you can do (short of GM commands) to improve a unit that has deteriorated from the rolls, so I'd rather just leave them static for now.

Xenon54z

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 336
  • Code should be like art.
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #5 on: 24 July 2014, 16:59:46 »
I just use the percentage based maintenance cost and turn off the maintenance rolls.

Is that an old rule or option to check in MHQ or something you just add manually?
Free air guitar! Just pick one up! Hurry Now!
Buy now while entropy is low!

pheonixstorm

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5548
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #6 on: 24 July 2014, 17:23:07 »
Its in the campaign options dialog in the maintenance section.

2ndAcr

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3165
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #7 on: 24 July 2014, 18:56:49 »
 Primary thing I do to avoid throwing my PC thru the window is I make dang sure all my equipment is set to Factory location and all mechs are assigned to Regular rated techs and above. At least it keeps me from going insane with all the damage.

 Once I am deployed or after a battle, I change location to either field or transport bay for battle damage repairs and such. But the in transit breakdown rate was so horrendous I had to use the above workaround.

scJazz

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1828
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #8 on: 24 July 2014, 20:52:43 »
Primary thing I do to avoid throwing my PC thru the window is I make dang sure all my equipment is set to Factory location and all mechs are assigned to Regular rated techs and above. At least it keeps me from going insane with all the damage.

 Once I am deployed or after a battle, I change location to either field or transport bay for battle damage repairs and such. But the in transit breakdown rate was so horrendous I had to use the above workaround.

Technically, everything but ASFs would be mothballed for any serious Transit. Heck, even the ASFs might be as well.

Unfortunately, mothballing and then unmothballing everything is so stunningly tedious that I said the hell with it and turned Maintenance option to -5 for my transits. Problem solved!

ralgith

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2251
    • Dylan's BattleTech Emporium
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #9 on: 24 July 2014, 22:37:27 »
Technically, everything but ASFs would be mothballed for any serious Transit. Heck, even the ASFs might be as well.

Unfortunately, mothballing and then unmothballing everything is so stunningly tedious that I said the hell with it and turned Maintenance option to -5 for my transits. Problem solved!

I disagree. My mech is going to be in a gantry, but NOT mothballed during transit. Typically routine maintenance will be performed during such a transit... at least any that can be done in zero-G.

pheonixstorm

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5548
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #10 on: 24 July 2014, 22:53:22 »
I still think the per mech method should be used in HQ rather than the advanced per part. It would really cut down of the amount of useless mechs after a month. We could leave in the per part method and make it optional. I find it a good way to train up my tech force

ralgith

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2251
    • Dylan's BattleTech Emporium
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #11 on: 25 July 2014, 03:30:17 »
I still think the per mech method should be used in HQ rather than the advanced per part. It would really cut down of the amount of useless mechs after a month. We could leave in the per part method and make it optional. I find it a good way to train up my tech force

Heh, don't get me wrong... I agree. But meh. Not a priority for me since there are ways to work around it and 90% of the time I don't use maintenance rolls and instead use the maintenance costs option Jatof9s created and I coded. It's much more realistic IMO. Though I'd like to have both at once, the rolls would need some serious tweaking first.

Dohon

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 71
  • Beware the bear!
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #12 on: 25 July 2014, 03:41:29 »
With regards to the percentage based maintenance, what percentage do you guys and gals use? Ten, twenty?

ralgith

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2251
    • Dylan's BattleTech Emporium
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #13 on: 25 July 2014, 03:52:19 »
With regards to the percentage based maintenance, what percentage do you guys and gals use? Ten, twenty?

Jayof9s and I both use the default. We've play tested it pretty hard, him more than me, but still quite a lot of testing.

Dohon

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 71
  • Beware the bear!
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #14 on: 25 July 2014, 04:26:38 »
Jayof9s and I both use the default. We've play tested it pretty hard, him more than me, but still quite a lot of testing.

Alright, thanks!

Thomasmarik

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #15 on: 25 July 2014, 11:05:03 »
Jayof9s and I both use the default. We've play tested it pretty hard, him more than me, but still quite a lot of testing.
You know what might be interesting witht he cost based maintenance.   Still assign techs and everything to the mechs and have the techs do the rol.  If they sicceed in their check aply a -1% discount to the cost per MoS

scJazz

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1828
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #16 on: 25 July 2014, 12:09:51 »
There are lots of interesting ways to implement a Maintenance system that works, as opposed to the one we have now. Which is correct by the rules but absurdly sub-standard.

The issue is someone sitting down with a random number generator and tweaking the intent of the Canon Rules, such that they don't reduce Mechs, etc to useless rubble during transit.

Jay and Ralgith already did it in a way and said... oh forget this highly busted system! We will charge EXTRA! Muhahahahaha! >:D No dice, no need to spend lots of man hours figuring out something fair, reasonable, and painful enough. BANG C-Bills straight to the wallet! O0

Which isn't to say I wouldn't like something better. Something between Jay's solution and Canon Rules.

Dohon

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 71
  • Beware the bear!
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #17 on: 25 July 2014, 14:46:57 »
You could combine both approaches. You pay the maintenance costs based on the unit value (Jayof9s/Ralgith), while also applying the maintenance rolls. You keep them at once a week, but allow for a "generous" (YMMV) modifier, so that you don't have to replace cockpits every week. The shifting quality modifiers would be disabled for the reason mentioned by Jayof9s.

IC explanation would be that mechs (and other vehicles) need maintenance on two levels: "routine" and "extensive". A fried circuit or a nicked myomer don't necessarily need the entire unit (cockpit, leg, ...) replaced. Those are covered by the maintenance costs. But every once in a while, a part may break down and require a replacement, which is covered by the maintenance rolls. This part is more rare, unless your warriors are total dolts and scrape the sides of the bay everytime they power up their ride.  :P Of course, being in the field or safely tucked in a dropship does make a difference, but that's something that MEKHQ already takes care of.

This might be too expensive (perhaps leave the percentage based maintenance payment off?) for a new mercenary unit, but it does dull the edge with regards to the modifiers. The exact maintenance roll modifier is a personal thing in any case.

Just two C-BILLs from a (very) green player. :)
« Last Edit: 25 July 2014, 14:48:41 by Dohon »

Thomasmarik

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #18 on: 25 July 2014, 18:13:25 »
Clearly I need to learn java :)

scJazz

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1828
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #19 on: 25 July 2014, 19:23:31 »
Clearly I need to learn java :)

No definitely not, well at least not in this case!

What is needed is for someone to sit down with a spreadsheet and a RN Generator and fixing both systems... Jay's and Canon, to actually work in a manner we expect across all Eras.

The Canon rules work excellently during the Jihad era for instance. Not even slightly surprising since it appears they were written while that Era was fresh in the minds of the Authors.

I'm thinking that tomorrow... since r1925 is so utterly broken I can't use it to resolve a battle, that I'm going to sit down and un-fubar this thing :) Then I can give the algorithm to the Devs and they can mess about :)

pheonixstorm

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5548
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #20 on: 25 July 2014, 22:19:33 »
Where in Strat Ops does it give era modifiers?

scJazz

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1828
Re: A question of maintenance
« Reply #21 on: 26 July 2014, 08:36:22 »
Where in Strat Ops does it give era modifiers?

Pg 170

 

Register