Register Register

Author Topic: "Next Generation" weapons  (Read 1799 times)

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 413
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #30 on: 29 March 2018, 22:59:23 »
The problem with laser clusters would be that they'd overlap with SRMs when it comes to range (lasers are short to mid range in my system), and overall fall in between SRMs and LRMs/ACs. I figure that there should be distances where there are missing or only weak niches, for additional tactical options. Say, you position a 'Mech so that enemy can't hit it with SRMs, but it isn't far away enough to make spending LRM or AC ammo attractive option against the mid-range target due to other target options.

So, in this system, do you have ammo bins that can be hit?  Is there a heat system that one needs to keep track of?
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3893
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #31 on: 29 March 2018, 23:09:04 »
Yes, probably built-in CASE though. It is primarily tech/equipment reset and "compression" with some rules tweaks for slightly faster gameplay, not an overhaul. Heat gauge might get some modifications.
Any actual rule tweaks will wait till draft 2 at least though.

Naturally lasers don't have explosive ammo but they do have high heat, especially for their damage and range. Precision is their role. Clusters would be opposite of that.
« Last Edit: 29 March 2018, 23:10:36 by Empyrus »

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 413
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #32 on: 29 March 2018, 23:30:26 »
Yes, probably built-in CASE though. It is primarily tech/equipment reset and "compression" with some rules tweaks for slightly faster gameplay, not an overhaul. Heat gauge might get some modifications.
Any actual rule tweaks will wait till draft 2 at least though.

Naturally lasers don't have explosive ammo but they do have high heat, especially for their damage and range. Precision is their role. Clusters would be opposite of that.

Precision may be their primary role for you, but consider the fact that they also have the trade off role of avoiding having ammo bins for the trade of a higher heat is a consideration that some others may desire.  Hence, a reason for having an energy-based cluster weapon.  Pulsing lasers just happen to provide an easy answer to that, as they already exist and the concept lends to it.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3893
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #33 on: 29 March 2018, 23:44:07 »
Intended to write CASE II. Ammo explosion are a risk but not like in standard BT.
But, not every niche should be filled. Critical seeking is important, and to do that there needs to be sacrifices.
One thing i'm trying to avoid is energy weapon dominance. They currently have several roles covered, but they should not have all of them.
Also, lasers are light and compact, so massed fire emulating cluster hits is possible. A single laser doing that would reduce value laser banks. Or lead to ridiculous amount of laser fire...

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 413
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #34 on: 30 March 2018, 12:04:59 »
Intended to write CASE II. Ammo explosion are a risk but not like in standard BT.
But, not every niche should be filled. Critical seeking is important, and to do that there needs to be sacrifices.
One thing i'm trying to avoid is energy weapon dominance. They currently have several roles covered, but they should not have all of them.
Also, lasers are light and compact, so massed fire emulating cluster hits is possible. A single laser doing that would reduce value laser banks. Or lead to ridiculous amount of laser fire...

Which is why heat with energy weapons is a factor, to prevent energy weapon dominance.

Hole punching is accomplished just as much with a PPC as it is with a Large Laser or a Gauss Rifle, leaving energy weapons' only value under this system to be a hole puncher unless you go with an array of the weapons.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Atarlost

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #35 on: 30 March 2018, 13:07:37 »
The problem with laser clusters would be that they'd overlap with SRMs when it comes to range (lasers are short to mid range in my system), and overall fall in between SRMs and LRMs/ACs. I figure that there should be distances where there are missing or only weak niches, for additional tactical options. Say, you position a 'Mech so that enemy can't hit it with SRMs, but it isn't far away enough to make spending LRM or AC ammo attractive option against the mid-range target due to other target options.
In-universe, this would create demand for further weapons development, writing just should come up with clever ways why the niche never gets filled properly...

SRMs don't need their own niche in the future of battletech because they'll be able to piggyback on the LRM's niche.  Laser clusters would have to be very good to overshadow 2-3 tons of ammo to give short range bite to the Artemis VI MML-15 you're already mounting for long range indirect fire. 

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3893
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #36 on: 30 March 2018, 13:21:37 »
SRMs don't need their own niche in the future of battletech because they'll be able to piggyback on the LRM's niche.  Laser clusters would have to be very good to overshadow 2-3 tons of ammo to give short range bite to the Artemis VI MML-15 you're already mounting for long range indirect fire.
I detest ATMs and MMLs. There should be no missile weapons that merge different missiles into one launcher. Too much homogenization with a category.

LRMs stay with minimum range, IMO. Clan upgrades vanished somewhere and for some reason. Special warheads don't make them multifunction weapons because they have special effects, they don't modify range. I might move special ammo to SRMs actually, LRMs would be for long range with indirect fire being their specialty.

And LRMs and ACs use large clusters, so they are not effective crit-seekers, and i won't have LB-X ACs, so there is a niche for small multiple hits. The SRMs fit this rather well.

(Besides, i need to come up with reason to explain SRM launchers in miniatures and art, they sure as hell don't look like laser arrays. Using actual SRMs seems like the simplest solution.)

My unguided rockets exists mostly to give 'Mechs some alternative to LRMs for longer range attacks, with some differences in function. They are will probably get cut or moved to experimental weapons though.
« Last Edit: 30 March 2018, 13:34:02 by Empyrus »

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3893
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #37 on: 30 March 2018, 14:00:13 »
Which is why heat with energy weapons is a factor, to prevent energy weapon dominance.
Heat system needs some tweaks to be honest. Currently it does nothing to prevent energy weapon dominance, even in introductory level games. Ideally heat shouldn't penalize ammo-using weapons as much, and should have some effect on energy weapons. At the same time, heat penalties shouldn't be game slowing and crippling, such as to-hit penalties. Movement penalties work because they force one to commit, but not certain about this yet.

Lasers should be hot enough to make pure laser arrays undesirable. There should be more mixing of weapons and ranges, and less bracket-firing, currently lasers tend to be ideal for bracket-firing designs (eg 2xERPPCs with 6xERMLs).
Hole punching is accomplished just as much with a PPC as it is with a Large Laser or a Gauss Rifle, leaving energy weapons' only value under this system to be a hole puncher unless you go with an array of the weapons.

"Only value"? Did you miss the part where i note plasma weapons cause enemy to heat up? Or how PPCs deal interference on the target (admittedly i didn't define this one, but let's just say it is a negative thing an enemy won't like).
It is not like lasers have a good separate niche of their own in BT right now. Let alone so many other other weapons.

Primary weapons (all ranges are relative):
-PPCs offer good power long range without ammo concerns and cause trouble for enemy (and the firing unit as well, if you fire within minimum range).
-ACs offer raw power with long range, but only few clusters. This is partially to avoid too large single hits being common, that honor is the Gauss Rifle's.
-The Gauss Rifle offers superb firepower with superb range but is too heavy to be a common primary weapon except for assault 'Mechs. Anything else might be a sniper, an "extreme" range direct fire specialist.
-Plasma weapons have options for LL range (medium, more damage) and PPC range (long, less damage), but they heat up the the target as well. The draw back is limited non-explosive ammo.

Secondary weapons:
-Lasers of all kinds provide short to medium range capabilities. More powerful than individual SRMs but pay with increased heat for that, and trade clusters for increased accuracy. Not powerful enough to work as primary weapons except for lighter units. Small lasers are efficient though, have enough of them and you can use them for cluster roles, medium lasers are too hot for this in practice. Large lasers are sorta mini-primary weapon at best.
-SRMs have similar range with lasers but are more focused on clusters and crit-seeking. Also have ammo options, such as EMP missiles or infernos.

Others:
-LRMs can be either primary or secondary weapons, but they are more like supporting weapons than anything else. Fire-support 'Mechs use them as primary, while others might carry them as secondary long range firepower. Indirect fire is their unique niche. They have few clusters so they aren't terribly great at crit seeking. Long minimum range.
-MGs and flamers are more like special purpose weapons with short range, but they can do some damage against 'Mechs. Small lasers tend to be more effective against 'Mechs though.

EDIT Dropped DEMP, HVCs and rockets from this list. Still thinking their specifics.
« Last Edit: 30 March 2018, 14:06:15 by Empyrus »

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 413
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #38 on: 30 March 2018, 16:23:26 »
Heat system needs some tweaks to be honest. Currently it does nothing to prevent energy weapon dominance, even in introductory level games. Ideally heat shouldn't penalize ammo-using weapons as much, and should have some effect on energy weapons. At the same time, heat penalties shouldn't be game slowing and crippling, such as to-hit penalties. Movement penalties work because they force one to commit, but not certain about this yet.

Lasers should be hot enough to make pure laser arrays undesirable. There should be more mixing of weapons and ranges, and less bracket-firing, currently lasers tend to be ideal for bracket-firing designs (eg 2xERPPCs with 6xERMLs).

Agreed.  Wasn't saying otherwise.  Energy boats were severely curtailed in the SHS days.  It wasn't until the DHS was made available that energy boats were considered anywhere near effective.

"Only value"? Did you miss the part where i note plasma weapons cause enemy to heat up? Or how PPCs deal interference on the target (admittedly i didn't define this one, but let's just say it is a negative thing an enemy won't like).

If heat isn't a problem for a pure energy boat, what a Plasma Rifle does will have to be obscenely broken to do anything of worth.  In addition, do not Infernos also do this same job as well?

PPC Interference cannot be too extreme without being completely broken, especially on the Hellstar or Awesome hulls.

But damage-wise, still just a hole-puncher.

It is not like lasers have a good separate niche of their own in BT right now. Let alone so many other other weapons.

I don't know, I always consider them the reliable weapons of Battletech, aside from the Heavies, at any rate.  To me, I have always seen the ML as the "ka-bar" of the Battlemech.  Pulse lasers trade range for accuracy without the danger and weight of the explodie cluster ammunition (which oddly goes to the longer ranged, lighter AC...?).

-ACs offer raw power with long range, but only few clusters. This is partially to avoid too large single hits being common, that honor is the Gauss Rifle's.

Power is diluted if it is clustered.  I can't really saw "raw power" with "clustered" with a straight face any more I can call a cLRM-20 "raw power".
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3893
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #39 on: 30 March 2018, 19:07:24 »
Uh, i think energy boats are pretty bad even before DHS. Most energy weapon conversions from intro 'Mechs tend to be way better than their standard versions. They weren't severely curtailed. Yeah, sure, if they heat up too much, they can't hit anything... but that same happens to 'Mechs with ballistic weapons AND those explode too.
I'll probably throw double heat sinks away completely. Even if they were to function like prototype DHS, ie they can't be mounted to engine, they're still maybe too good.

Plasma weapons need to heat up enemy just enough it will curtail their fire OR force them to overheat. It is one thing to decide by yourself you'll risk overheating, and completely another to have that forced on you. In standard BT, the Plasma Rifle deals 1d6 extra heat to target, i'm thinking the same or perhaps i'll just replace it with fixed amount (3 or 4?). Need to consider exact heat effects and typical cooling before settling to any number.

As for infernos replicating Plasma Rifle role... well, they lack the same range for one thing. And when you shoot infernos, you ain't doing damage. Plasmas do both at once. It is not entirely same. My intent is not to remove all duplicate things from equipment set, only reduce to them to reasonable number, and any leftovers should have some differences.

Interference, good point. I was thinking somewhat disruptive effect, something like +1 to hit penalty for one round, no stacking. But with 2d6 throws, even that modifier is strong. Maybe it could affect energy weapons only, perhaps it will just disrupt electronics like BAP and ECM (which will have larger and/or different presence how they work now). Alternatively i'll just modify the dice first, or maybe i'll come up with some other effect. Any ideas? Even if PPC won't get the effect, i might throw it to special missiles or TSEMP/DEMP.
Note that currently the interference effect is inspired by MechWarrior IV's PPC hits messing with your HUD.

The Hellstar won't happen because i won't make PPCs 15 pointers. Any Hellstar-clone will have to settle for less, and so won't be particularly impressive.
Clan 'Mech successors are actually a problem, i prefer to base tech to Inner Sphere stuff more so than Clan stuff. Maybe i can mix the weights with Inner Sphere stats? But then "Inner Sphere 'Mechs" could end up overgunned. Of course, it is too early to really think about how specific 'Mechs end up looking.
I'm inclined to make things move faster by keeping armor levels down rather than upping all weapons damage though.


As for AC power... Three sizes: light, medium, heavy (no AC/20 equivalent, not sure what i'll do for that). Range rises with size, to avoid the weird inverse relations of current ACs, thinking ranges of 16/18/20 starting from light (PPC would be 18 as usual, Gauss would be 22-24). For cluster hits, i'm currently thinking bursts of 3, which means 2 hits on average. If damages were 6/8/10, we'd be looking at 12-16-20 damage on average. I figure that's pretty good for power, even if it won't be concentrated. EDIT A driving force here is to keep light AC a competitive primary weapon and better than large laser for heavy-end of mediums, 12 points on average for it might be too high.
For comparison, current Ultra AC/10 deals only 10 points usually.
If burst is upped to 4, damage should be probably lowered as average hits would number 3. But i wouldn't go over 4 clusters.
« Last Edit: 30 March 2018, 19:14:16 by Empyrus »

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4049
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #40 on: 31 March 2018, 05:58:17 »

Concerning Interference.

I think that might fit as a bonus for overcharging a PPC (Advanced option).
Pro: More damage and Interference for the target
Con: Risk of explosion 
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Greatclub

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 124
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #41 on: 31 March 2018, 06:04:53 »
Which is why heat with energy weapons is a factor, to prevent energy weapon dominance.

The 20 free heat dissipation makes it hard to argue with energy weapon(s) being the primary bite of a mech, whether that be 6 M-Las or one ER-PPC. On a weight/damage/range basis it just makes sense until you're well into medium mech territory.

Then factor in the lack of explodium (ammo) built into the mech, and energy weapons look very good indeed.

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3893
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #42 on: 31 March 2018, 08:56:19 »
Concerning Interference.

I think that might fit as a bonus for overcharging a PPC (Advanced option).
Pro: More damage and Interference for the target
Con: Risk of explosion

PPCs having built-in capacitor system? Sounds like an interesting idea. Unfortunately it probably isn't suitable for "standard rules" :/

Also, recently found out HBS BattleTech PPCs cause to-hit penalty to target for one round, apparently. Now that i think of this, i may have heard of this earlier (i sure as hell didn't notice it during the beta), which might be where i got the idea, rather than MWIV's HUD distortion folllowin PPC hits. (Incidentally MWO has PPCs disabling ECM as well...)

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 413
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #43 on: 31 March 2018, 14:19:57 »
The 20 free heat dissipation makes it hard to argue with energy weapon(s) being the primary bite of a mech, whether that be 6 M-Las or one ER-PPC. On a weight/damage/range basis it just makes sense until you're well into medium mech territory.

Then factor in the lack of explodium (ammo) built into the mech, and energy weapons look very good indeed.

Double Heat Sinks changed that dynamic hugely, no argument.  In a way, it was almost needed when the ER versions of PPC and Laser were introduced with the 50% increase in heat load for no damage improvement and a relatively minor increase in range.  Before that, though, you'd have 'Mechs like the Warhammer, Marauder, and Awesome having to cycle the weapons to avoid heat problems.

I believe Empyrus mentioned earlier that there would only be one heat sink type in his setup, but the heat levels of the weapons would be changed to reflect that they are all more advanced versions, but the weapons themselves would run "hotter" to even things out.

This doesn't change the fact that high heat was and is the balancing factor for energy weapons lack of ammunition and smaller size.  That it's impact has been reduced in the current system isn't in doubt, just that it is there.  Unfortunately, the only ballistic weapons that were able to take advantage of the DHS when introduced was the AC/20 and artillery.  I think that if Battletech was streamlined and construction still viable, Empyrus' stated intent in having a "heat squash" is a very good direction to go with.
« Last Edit: 31 March 2018, 16:37:02 by Charistoph »
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4049
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #44 on: 31 March 2018, 14:30:54 »

If one wants to really help non-energy weapons then aim should be on utility:
Ammo weapons: More then just damage with tactical options of various ammunitions and modes.
Energy weapons: Only Line-Of-Sight damage (no effects) and an -2 penalty towards causing critical damage (damage is too fine cut).
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 413
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #45 on: 31 March 2018, 16:44:16 »
If one wants to really help non-energy weapons then aim should be on utility:
Ammo weapons: More then just damage with tactical options of various ammunitions and modes.
Energy weapons: Only Line-Of-Sight damage (no effects) and an -2 penalty towards causing critical damage (damage is too fine cut).

A size review may also be in place as well.  Medium lasers are awesome because they have minimal weight cost and minimal size constraints.  Now, if they were set up to be more of a Heavy Medium Pulse Laser (as the different techs amalgamated everything together) in terms of pre-squash heat, weight, and crit size, it wouldn't be quite so ubiquitous.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Cannonshop

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1430
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #46 on: 31 March 2018, 17:34:18 »
Consider this as you frenzy over these concepts: the original introductory ruleset was written to a specific sort of balance, and Clantech, while it did disrupt that, didn't overturn the basic concepts quite so much.

Now, you're talking changing the basic dynamics of the game itself, as a core rule.

so you need to ask yourself:  "What is my endgame objective?"

How do you want the game to play?

lemme give you an example of what I'm talking about...

3005-3025: the Introtech era.  We have ballistic weapons, we have energy weapons, we have a situation where only one energy weapon (the PPC) and one ballistic weapon (the AC-20) are capable of nailing a cockpit and destroying the head it's mounted on, we've got a mix of missile, ballistic, and energy weapons that isn't uniform in the canon designs, because the setting involves a sort of "game of thrones mixed with Mad Max" feeling, a REAL 'Dark ages" complete with analogues for the various European royal families and the pre-Reformation catholic church.  It's "Rome has fallen and we're scrabbling for the scraps".

3035-3049: The Helm Core era/recovered tech/we've got a dominant empire era.  WE start seeing ballistics doing cluster damage, a few minor improvements to armor and other systems, extended range energy weapons (Congratulations, you've reached the equivalent of the 15th Century's early renaissance!).

3050-3067: Clantech era. technologies take a massive jump, but follow the same patterns, only with less weight, or more range, or more damage, or some combination thereof.  everyone is still copying everyone else's advances.  (See: Heavy Machine Gun, "Light" machine gun having the same stats whether Clanner or Inner Sphere, only the weights are different.)

3068-31xx; Maxtech Rulez, nothing munchkin that was ever published is excluded, and some of the rules added only make sense mathematically.  even here, there was some attempt at balancing, but we're a long way from 3005's fairly narrow set of rules and equipment.  The point where the weapons lists and special rules require additional volumes is well  past, and you can't both generate a custom unit, and run a game out of the same 300 page book.

instead, it takes seven volumes and you're going to spend a LOT of time looking things up.

which is great for book sales, but maybe not so great for bringing in newer players, which is why the quickstart rules had to be created.

So...

you're talking about a massive jump in timeline, and a change to the tech-base...

what's your objective? How do you want this game you're designing to actually PLAY? how many new products are you going to need to play it? How compatible w/ previous versions  of the game are you comfortable with?

who's  your audience, and how will it work with increasing that audience?

alright, business rant over.

Here's a few of MY suggestions:

1. Faction specific developments to solve different problems.  This is like a reaction to the HMG/LMG stat thing, but it applies to a range of ideas...

a) variant solutions that aren't so much raw better/worse than different approaches to the same problem.  a "Heavy" mg that does 2D6 to infantry and ranges out to 6 hexes for 2 points of armor damage-but, does 3 per shot internal explosion when the ammo bin is critted, for the same .5 tons/weapon as a Clanner HMG that does 30% more damage at 1/3 the range.
b)MMLs as standard missile launchers with selectible (by tonnage lot) ammo, without integral Artemis because sometimes, it's not worth equipping.
c)Improved version Infernoes for vehicle killing.  how it works: one hit, forces a survival roll, vehicle makes the roll, they need to un-ass from the location or die next turn. Roll is a piloting difficulty base 8.  (basically, the OLD inferno rules). Kills 3D6 infantry or 1 BA trooper per turn spent in the zone, fire zone lasts 1D6 turns, clears heavy woods in a single shot, (SRM only). This basically goes back to the 'old' inferno rules, and makes pillboxing your tank a losing proposition unless...
d)Fire suppression systems: requires 10% of your vehicle tonnage, for Battlesuits a fire suppression system weighs 100 Kilos.  Completely negates all fire damage including inferno for up to 3 turns, has an 'ammo' stat giving 2 charges per BA suit, or tonnage divided by 5 charges per vehicle.
e) Chaff/jammer dispensers for aircraft.  clutters incoming fire, adds plus Three to the attacker's difficulty, limited to half-tonnage lots on aSF andVTOL units, ammo based with 5 shots/ton devoted. May be carried as external stores.
f) VTOL air-droppable probes/sensor dispensers.  sold in 1/4 ton lots like Clan MGs, delivers 5 localized probes that negate ECM, Camouflage and Stealth systems in the seven hexes they cover. May be destroyed by infantry on a successful short range attack roll.

I beats the Urbie to death with my CHARGER!!!

Atarlost

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #47 on: 31 March 2018, 22:19:43 »
"Next Generation" weapons have to be continuations of "This Generation" weapons. 

The first step is mix and match and upgrade to Clanspec.  There is no ERLPPC or ERHPPC, but there's no reason ER tech shouldn't apply to them and we can guess what they look like: +50% heat and the range of a Star League ERPPC.  What would a Clan Ultra HVAC LBX autocannon look like? 

The second step is to cull.  The Clan Ultra HVAC LBX is probably too hard to keep operational.  Maybe the Clan LBX with standard AC ammo options is good enough and more reliable.  Or maybe gauss and SBG/HAG kill autocannons entirely.  This should be done based on what would actually make sense to in-universe quartermasters, not an irrational aversion to ATMs and MMLs because they're too good of ideas to die unless everyone is smashed all the way back to Age of War tech again. 

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3893
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #48 on: 31 March 2018, 22:43:43 »
Balanced game first, lore should follow that, build around that. Hence no middle steps, a time skip, and replacing everything completely. Making things based on what is actually logical does not necessarily lead particularly fun game, IMO. It is part of the reason we have such a ****** bloated equipment list already.

BT does not need any more stuff, it needs existing list massively pruned, consolidated, and in case of redundancies that can't be/shouldn't be removed, somewhat diversified.

Consolidating everything to Clan Tech plus stuff that only the IS tech base has (eg TSEMP) could work... except this does not solve the fact there are massive balance problems within that tech base (energy weapons dominate Clans even more so than in the Inner Sphere), and large amount of redundant equipment. Worst offenders are massively redundant laser and AC options, and weird middle form missile launchers that attempt to do multiple things once (there should not be universal weapons).
It just easier to throw everything away and then start building things with a goal in mind.

I really don't care for another middle step era like the Dark Age (i like the Dark Age setting, not the bloated equipment list), an era that is just another step before we finally get to where we should be now.
Also, middle-steps don't allow moving intro box and introduction point to BattleTech to same point as the timeline. Too much stuff, too many options (tournament level tech isn't complex enough to be a problem, there's just too much of it). It is one reason for clean-slate tech base and equipment.

idea weenie

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1755
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #49 on: 01 April 2018, 00:56:46 »
A couple ideas, one semi-Star League tech, one low tech.

Semi-Star League tech:
Half mass heat sinks.  .5 tons, 1 crit.  What this means is that putting these in an engine gives you only the ability to dump 10 heat per turn from the engine, compared to the 20 heat from a DHS equipped engine.  This provides better heat dissipation rates than standard heat sinks per ton, and since each is only a single critical it provides a lot more padding in case of internal hits.


Low tech:
Heat Sump
Each ton of mass allocated to a heat sump can absorb 4 pts of heat before it is put into the heat scale.  This can be set up by the player so it only absorbs heat after a certain point on the heat scale,

Obvious use:
Set it to heat 8 on the scale before it begins absorbing heat, and you have a much nicer heat curve you can ride when using TSM.

Obvious down side: it only absorbs heat, it does not dissipate it.  So if you replace 5 heat sinks with 5 tons of thermal sump, that is 20 pts of heat you can absorb into the thermal sump, but you will have to dissipate the heat eventually.

Mech sheet change:
Draw in a set of 4 rows, and X columns, where X is the number of Heat Sumps the Mech has.  Record heat from left to right, then from the bottom row to the top row.

Damage handling:
When a critical location containing a Heat Sump has been hit, mark off the left-hand column of the Heat Sump chart.  The good part is the water will dump the extra heat out of your Mech.  The down part is you lost its capacity.  When you get back to base, put in another tank of water to replace it.

Technical description: It is a set of ~1 cubic meter tanks of water with small tubes of coolant flowing through them.  At the Repair Bay you can have the tech team freeze the water, and during battle you initially melt the ice, then heat up the water instead of heating up your Mech.  During the battle, your heat sinks are working both to remove the heat from your Mech, but also cool down the water.

(I am thinking it would be 1:1 for heat in vs heat out when in positive operation, but cooling to a negative would requiring 2:1.  So the 5 tons above would initially have a -20 in the Heat sump, and after firing 3 PPCs every turn, the Thermal Sump is at 0.  This is from the engine also cooling off 10 heat per turn.  2 turns after that, and the 20 capacity Thermal Sump is 'full' of heat, and the mech must dump the heat.  Assuming it can do so without firing weapons, it cools off at the following rate:
20 -> 10 -> 0
Now the system tries to refreeze the water.  For some reason this takes more effort than just cooling off the water:
0 -> -5 -> -10 -> -20
Basically, for every 2 pts of heat sink capacity, it removes 1 pt of heat if the new heat will be a negative value.  The base has a larger coolant system, so it has much less trouble refreezing the water in the tank.

Korzon77

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2067
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #50 on: 01 April 2018, 00:56:56 »
The problem with nextg generation weapons is that well, let's put it this way-- 3025 mechs should do as well asgainst 3100 mechs as 1925 tanks do against 2000 tanks.  IE, turkey shoot. But that's not fun for a lot of the game players, so you run into the other problem of there being a very narrow window between: Wow, an SRM with new rules that pretty much isn't worth the invest ment and and "whelp, time to scrap all the mechs that came before."

Daryk

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5344
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #51 on: 01 April 2018, 06:33:39 »
A couple ideas, one semi-Star League tech, one low tech.

Semi-Star League tech:
Half mass heat sinks.  .5 tons, 1 crit.  What this means is that putting these in an engine gives you only the ability to dump 10 heat per turn from the engine, compared to the 20 heat from a DHS equipped engine.  This provides better heat dissipation rates than standard heat sinks per ton, and since each is only a single critical it provides a lot more padding in case of internal hits.
*snip*

A nice idea, but I think they should be 2 crits each.  That makes a full on Star League DHS at 3 crits better in almost every way, thus explaining why we don't see Half Heat Sinks.  Of course, if you want to encourage use of HHS, make them compatible with either SHS or DHS.  That could allow HS back in the legs of 'mechs with DHS.

I see the progression as:

I: SHS, 1 ton, 1 crit, 1 heat
II: HHS, 0.5 ton, 2 crits, 1 heat
III: DHS, 1 ton, 3 crits, 2 heat
IV: CDHS, 1 ton, 2 crits, 2 heat

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4049
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #52 on: 01 April 2018, 08:58:29 »
"whelp, time to scrap all the mechs that came before."
Well that is kind of the point, but see it like the transition from primitive to standard tech.
Some mechs get upgraded to the new tech level and others go into the museum.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 413
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #53 on: 01 April 2018, 13:36:50 »
Well that is kind of the point, but see it like the transition from primitive to standard tech.
Some mechs get upgraded to the new tech level and others go into the museum.

Like the Thunderbolt versus the Mackie.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

phoenixalpha

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 325
  • For God, Prince Davion & the Federated Suns
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #54 on: 01 April 2018, 15:50:52 »
Well that is kind of the point, but see it like the transition from primitive to standard tech.
Some mechs get upgraded to the new tech level and others go into the museum.

Would be better if the jump was 100 years of tech advances. Kinda like an F35 v a Sopwith Camel - ie no contest whatsoever.

Atarlost

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #55 on: 01 April 2018, 19:46:31 »
Bowing to balance and giving no weight to what makes sense in universe is what brought us insanely overweight autocannons, pointlessly short range machineguns, ludicrously explosive ammo, capacitors that only bow up when used in gauss rifles and not in lasers or PPCs, and centuries of technological progress providing nothing but pointless sidegrades or occasionally downgrades that clutter the equipment list.

If you don't want continuity a timeskip won't help you.  What you actually want is an AU age of war, which belongs in its own thread. 

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 413
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #56 on: 01 April 2018, 20:01:15 »
Would be better if the jump was 100 years of tech advances. Kinda like an F35 v a Sopwith Camel - ie no contest whatsoever.

Not really a fair comparison.  We've seen several mech lines go from Primitive to Intro to Advanced, and even some go to 2C models (Wolverine, for example).  Meanwhile, we've seen a few mech lines never get out of the Primitive status (Mackie), or not survived long after the Intro upgrade (Swordsman).

Part of that is that unless 'Mechs get a completely different motive system, they can still be designed around the same principles.  A sopwith camel could be built along modern design materials, but it would stop being a proper biplane as soon as you put a turbine engine in it.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3893
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #57 on: 01 April 2018, 20:07:31 »
I was thinking that handwaved fluff justification for tech that is far, far better than anything better is that during a peace time, scientists could finally focus on stuff normally, and came up with several advances in materials technologies, advances that relied on cross-discipline ideas that weren't really studied during wartime. These advances were naturally used for military purposes, creating new armor material that was basically impervious to existing weapons, but new weapons soon followed, specifically engineered to defeat the new armor (compromises lead to loss of range or features in some cases).
And a dramatic finish: "And now, there is a war brewing and the first generation of new weapons will meet their trial by fire..."
« Last Edit: 01 April 2018, 20:09:55 by Empyrus »

Charistoph

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 413
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #58 on: 01 April 2018, 22:43:16 »
I was thinking that handwaved fluff justification for tech that is far, far better than anything better is that during a peace time, scientists could finally focus on stuff normally, and came up with several advances in materials technologies, advances that relied on cross-discipline ideas that weren't really studied during wartime. These advances were naturally used for military purposes, creating new armor material that was basically impervious to existing weapons, but new weapons soon followed, specifically engineered to defeat the new armor (compromises lead to loss of range or features in some cases).
And a dramatic finish: "And now, there is a war brewing and the first generation of new weapons will meet their trial by fire..."

Can I just say "Rifles"?
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Atarlost

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 49
Re: "Next Generation" weapons
« Reply #59 on: 01 April 2018, 23:27:17 »
I was thinking that handwaved fluff justification for tech that is far, far better than anything better is that during a peace time, scientists could finally focus on stuff normally, and came up with several advances in materials technologies, advances that relied on cross-discipline ideas that weren't really studied during wartime. These advances were naturally used for military purposes, creating new armor material that was basically impervious to existing weapons, but new weapons soon followed, specifically engineered to defeat the new armor (compromises lead to loss of range or features in some cases).

The one thing you can't ever justify getting rid of based on improvements to armor is the concept of designing two missiles of the same weight and shape with different proportions of propellant and warhead.  If you want to not have the ATM and MML you have to go AU before their invention. 

Well, actually, that isn't the only thing.  Kinetic energy transfer is kinetic energy transfer.  If your new armor is impervious to old gauss rifles it's also impervious to any nonexplosive projectile.  On the bright side you no longer have to worry about making sure ballistic weapons have a niche because the magic armor you're using to wipe the slate clean is impervious to them. 

For what you want it's far more sensible to go AU from when BAR 10 armor is first introduced.  And let the next generation weapons thread discuss next generation weapons instead of alternate first generation weapons.