Unhappy with LAMs: brainstorming

[Daemion]

So a LAM in Fighter Mode should be treated like a ground unit?
...

There are rules for glancing blows in Tactical Ops. I don't think it has anything to do with the targets CPU as to the accuracy of the shooter.
...

I can kind of see using the gyro to make a LAM more agile in space but isn't the gyro to keep the mech more stable?
...

I think the LAM gained the long distance navigation with the 3 Avionics crits it gained. Of course I've yet to understand how the same weapon can have such vastly different ranges depending on what unit it's on.

All of this is related so I'll tackle it all at once. 

Yes.  I am suggesting that you treat LAM fighters in fighter mode as ground units for targeting.  I'm also suggesting it can be simplified to you have to engage them in a dogfight, instead of focusing on strafing or strike attacks.

But, I'm only making this suggestion for folks who can get behind the notion that the target unit takes some pre-programmed, automated defensive maneuvers while taking fire.  If you can't, then it doesn't work thematically as you see BattleTech's tech working.

Regardless of whether the target is doing anything or not, a weapon's performance is largely based on Fire Control.  I'm imagining something far more CPU and programing driven, though there may be structural elements to it.  I never really thought of BT Fire Control (FC) as iron-sights, dead-stick style of targeting. Combine Sensor Crit damage with the fact that Lasers are near instantaneous weapons that shouldn't miss.

I honestly think that ground units should be able to fire at low- and high-altitude ranges when engaging air targets.  They decided against that in the current set of rules, though.  AT2 never really tackled it, so it's possible to infer room for that kind of thing in prior rule-sets, in the form of house rules.

However, under the current rules paradigm, this would seem to fit, as long as you're accepting of a conceptual In-Universe theme.

And under that jinky theme, there's a defensive maneuver aspect.  While the gyro is largely there to stabilize the Mech, I largely think that it can be used creatively for defensive maneuvers.  People ask about how a Mech could jink while running. Gyro.  If it can be attributed to that, then it can do the same for units in space.  I imagine the LAM developers would have been aware of this and worked with it when designing the AirMech and Fighter modes of the LAM.

So, it was just a suggestion.  Take it or leave it.

[RifleMech]

Beyond Visual Range.  Most space engagements outside one hex (18 km) are beyond visual range.

As for altitude values, they have those in Total Warfare, as well as AT2.  Would you like me to PM those values?

Ah.  Thanks.

Sure. Thanks.

All of this is related so I'll tackle it all at once. 

Yes.  I am suggesting that you treat LAM fighters in fighter mode as ground units for targeting.  I'm also suggesting it can be simplified to you have to engage them in a dogfight, instead of focusing on strafing or strike attacks.

But, I'm only making this suggestion for folks who can get behind the notion that the target unit takes some pre-programmed, automated defensive maneuvers while taking fire.  If you can't, then it doesn't work thematically as you see BattleTech's tech working.

Like a drone?

But wouldn't a unit taking control out of the pilot's hands be a bad thing?

Regardless of whether the target is doing anything or not, a weapon's performance is largely based on Fire Control.  I'm imagining something far more CPU and programing driven, though there may be structural elements to it.  I never really thought of BT Fire Control (FC) as iron-sights, dead-stick style of targeting. Combine Sensor Crit damage with the fact that Lasers are near instantaneous weapons that shouldn't miss.

I don't think iron sites are just iron sites. Movement of the the body, even breath can change the aim.

I honestly think that ground units should be able to fire at low- and high-altitude ranges when engaging air targets.  They decided against that in the current set of rules, though.  AT2 never really tackled it, so it's possible to infer room for that kind of thing in prior rule-sets, in the form of house rules.

However, under the current rules paradigm, this would seem to fit, as long as you're accepting of a conceptual In-Universe theme.

I do to. I'd still have to look up some rules to check for attacks against high altitude units. I can see some weapon limits on that. Its latest version that changes AS vs VTOL combat. It's really bizarre.

And under that jinky theme, there's a defensive maneuver aspect.  While the gyro is largely there to stabilize the Mech, I largely think that it can be used creatively for defensive maneuvers.  People ask about how a Mech could jink while running. Gyro.  If it can be attributed to that, then it can do the same for units in space.  I imagine the LAM developers would have been aware of this and worked with it when designing the AirMech and Fighter modes of the LAM.

So, it was just a suggestion.  Take it or leave it.

I can sort of see the gyro doing that or maybe being turned off so the LAM is more unstable and thus more maneuverable.

[Daemion]

Like a drone?

But wouldn't a unit taking control out of the pilot's hands be a bad thing?

I don't think iron sites are just iron sites. Movement of the the body, even breath can change the aim.

Think of the auto-aim feature in video games.  Without it, your shot will go where you point it.  With it on, your in-game character/avatar homes in on the target with more precision, and you can simply pull the trigger when you're close enough to hit.

Besides, BVR combat is all outside the pilot's control.  He can line up the shot in only the most general of ways.  It's up to the Fire Control computers to do the rest.  This is even true of combat tanks today.  They have computer assisted aiming that gives them the accuracy that tread-heads are proud of. 

Secondly, when you can't see the shot incoming, how are you going to react to it? Unless you have a computer reading the sensors and at least giving you a warning, you can't.  Combine that with most BattleTech weapons being FTL or very near it, and your reaction time won't be fast enough, anyway.

So, yeah.  In a lot of ways, it's better for the mount to do the actual hard work, and the pilot/Knight to merely guide it where to go, and who to fire at.

And, by the time of the first Mech, we've had roughly 500 years of nearly unchecked tech progression.  Stuff like that would be rather trivial, at that point.

The future battlefield is almost here, and it will be very scary when it finally arrives.

[RifleMech]

Think of the auto-aim feature in video games.  Without it, your shot will go where you point it.  With it on, your in-game character/avatar homes in on the target with more precision, and you can simply pull the trigger when you're close enough to hit.

Besides, BVR combat is all outside the pilot's control.  He can line up the shot in only the most general of ways.  It's up to the Fire Control computers to do the rest.  This is even true of combat tanks today.  They have computer assisted aiming that gives them the accuracy that tread-heads are proud of. 

Secondly, when you can't see the shot incoming, how are you going to react to it? Unless you have a computer reading the sensors and at least giving you a warning, you can't.  Combine that with most BattleTech weapons being FTL or very near it, and your reaction time won't be fast enough, anyway.

So, yeah.  In a lot of ways, it's better for the mount to do the actual hard work, and the pilot/Knight to merely guide it where to go, and who to fire at.

And, by the time of the first Mech, we've had roughly 500 years of nearly unchecked tech progression.  Stuff like that would be rather trivial, at that point.

The future battlefield is almost here, and it will be very scary when it finally arrives.

I get all this. LAMs in fighter mode would have it. They'd have BVR targeting. I would think that most  modern aircraft have sensors to warn if they've been targeted. I don't understand the change in ranges though. I can see some increase do to elevation but otherwise the ranges should be the same. Its like ground combat is SciFi and aerospace combat is science.

[Daemion]

Ground Combat is SciFant (Science Fantasy).  Space and air combat is hard Sci-fi.

[RifleMech]

Exactly and that's where things break down. Weapon ranges shouldn't just change because of what the weapon is mounted on or what mode thubi 6in. And VTOLs should be capable of engaging in dogfights with aircraft. Not every aerospace unit travels at mach speeds. Some are slow enough as toi using MP.