Mech design decisions that make no sense

[massey]

I wonder if anyone has read the entry on it in TRO 3050 Upgrade....

I sure didn’t.

[The_Caveman]

I'm just glad the Lyrans only built the Eisenfaust and didn't make a trend of building mechs with big hands.

Commando refits in Tyrolian caps and lederhosen?

in theory the Streak-2 missiles on so many refits and new builds of the 50's would be to allow the mechs to operate longer behind enemy lines on clan worlds and in anti-clan hit and run campaigns on the frontlines.

IMO the best quality of the Streak is you can just tape the fire button down because it won't generate heat or expend ammo unless you damage the target in return. Switching an SRM-6 for a pair of Streak-2s is a no-brainer outside of having to pay more for the ammo.

[Sir Chaos]

Commando refits in Tyrolian caps and lederhosen?

Prohibited by the Ares Convention.

And not even the WoB stooped that low.

[Robroy]

I wonder if anyone has read the entry on it in TRO 3050 Upgrade....

I have not, but if you want to send me a copy I would love to. ;D

[Kit deSummersville]

IMO the best quality of the Streak is you can just tape the fire button down because it won't generate heat or expend ammo unless you damage the target in return. Switching an SRM-6 for a pair of Streak-2s is a no-brainer outside of having to pay more for the ammo.

I like SRMs a lot but the lack of options on Streaks sours me on them. I'm not as diverse as Weirdo but I love me some infernos.

[Colt Ward]

Infernoes, HARMs, Tear Gas for crowd control, never used TC but eventually I will, and NARC are all good reasons . . .

The ones I wonder about are Clan Prototype Streak launchers- can they fire those type ammos . . .

[Liam's Ghost]

I wonder if anyone has read the entry on it in TRO 3050 Upgrade....

I read it twice just now, what's your point?

Because it seems to suggest that the 4D was a downgrade resulting from Comstar's inability to replicate the stealth systems, but the Master Unit List indicates it was in general service with the SLDF since 2660 (including in regular formations), and operation Klondike even turned out a royal variant of the non-stealth 4D.

In fact, those two data points suggest the 4C was the only elite stealthy hunter killer of the bunch, while the 4D (and later the 4Db) was more of a general service mech.

[deathfrombeyond]

Infernoes, HARMs, Tear Gas for crowd control, never used TC but eventually I will, and NARC are all good reasons . . .

I can see all of those being a valid use case for holding onto base srm launchers, except for narc.

I imagine that the majority of narc capable missiles actually used are lrms, not srms. What say you guys?

[Colt Ward]

I think NARC had a period, with tech retcon now, where they would have shined 3040-3060 with tech change over- problem is a lack of dedicated NARC'ing machines.  But if you had a series of them (either purpose built or refit) and were already doing NARC LRMs, then having some NARC SRMs for your forces would be a good idea.  Especially when you start getting BA toting compact NARC launchers.

[Firesprocket]

The ones I wonder about are Clan Prototype Streak launchers- can they fire those type ammos . . .

Streak missiles are their own ammunition type so the cannot be used to fire other munitions. The Streak LRM system is still something I have yet to weigh in on.   The loss of IDF makes it less desirable.  In theory, if one doesn't care about flak bonus, it would make an efficient replacement for a HAG 20 or an Ultra 10 assuming you accept your damage would be spread across the target.

I think NARC had a period, with tech retcon now, where they would have shined 3040-3060 with tech change over- problem is a lack of dedicated NARC'ing machines.  But if you had a series of them (either purpose built or refit) and were already doing NARC LRMs, then having some NARC SRMs for your forces would be a good idea.  Especially when you start getting BA toting compact NARC launchers.

My outstanding issue with NARC remains the range of the launcher. INARC was an improvement in the right direction, but it is featured even less.  I would love to see the NARC system have a little better range than it does now and/or more scout chassis carry them with some better variety.  The Owens and the Raven come to mind as mechs that carry them, but the suffer from a lack of secondary weaponry or are to slow for their intended role by late Jihad.

[Daryk]

Honestly, I think NARC rounds would have made more sense as Thunderbolt-5 alternate ammunition...

[Colt Ward]

The Owens is a Omni, give it a supercharger to hit 8/12(16) . . . but no, I was meaning things like Pegasus and VTOLs to get that NARC on target.  We should have had simpler/cheaper Tufana type vehicles in 3050.  It just would have made so much sense as a force multiplier against the Clans- even if LRMs are more League flavor!  The Stiletto, Ottscout 9S should have had a variant dropping the A-Pods & a ERML to get the NARC, Talons, etc.  I wish it got a OS like the BA has (or just mount the BA system!) . . . heck, a NARC launcher as a handheld would be nice.

I understand Streaks have their own ammo type, but the Prototypes are not full up systems.  I need to find Klondike and see what it says.

[Scotty]

Honestly, I think NARC rounds would have made more sense as Thunderbolt-5 alternate ammunition...

Only in a world where Thunderbolt aren't relegated to the advanced rules book for.....?

[Daryk]

In such a world, the Thunderbolt wouldn't be limited to just the advanced rules book...

[The_Caveman]

Infernoes, HARMs, Tear Gas for crowd control, never used TC but eventually I will, and NARC are all good reasons . . .

The ones I wonder about are Clan Prototype Streak launchers- can they fire those type ammos . . .

With the TW nerf on Infernoes and Frag missiles making them scarcely worth the risk of the bins I'd rather just have the Streaks. Streak renders Narc irrelevant.

If I-OS launchers were made standard and backdated to the introduction of regular launchers, those would be the ideal vehicle for special SRM ammos.

[Daryk]

That sounds a lot like special ammo for Rocket Launchers... which I'm not opposed to in any way...  ^-^

[Firesprocket]

Honestly, I think NARC rounds would have made more sense as Thunderbolt-5 alternate ammunition...

That's higher than I was aiming for, but I'd take it.  All I was necessarily aiming for was a 4/8/12 range band that the Clan version has.  Anything over and beyond is gravy.  I personally think all those nifty little munitions that I-NARC has would also make NARC more attractive.  NARC is a nifty little system in that once you hit something with something you never need to spot that target again for IDF as long as it doesn't have a ECM bubble to muffle the NARC's single.  That, unfortunately is part of the issue that makes it less desirable even if you boost the range.

The Owens is a Omni, give it a supercharger to hit 8/12(16) . . . but no, I was meaning things like Pegasus and VTOLs to get that NARC on target.  We should have had simpler/cheaper Tufana type vehicles in 3050.  It just would have made so much sense as a force multiplier against the Clans- even if LRMs are more League flavor!  The Stiletto, Ottscout 9S should have had a variant dropping the A-Pods & a ERML to get the NARC, Talons, etc.  I wish it got a OS like the BA has (or just mount the BA system!) . . . heck, a NARC launcher as a handheld would be nice.

I understand Streaks have their own ammo type, but the Prototypes are not full up systems.  I need to find Klondike and see what it says.

Oh I get it.  The fact that there isn't a VTOL out there to launch NARC and INARC munitions I always found as strange.  Apparently there is a Scimitar that has both a NARC and TAG that was built in 3050.  I hadn't noticed it before tonight. It's DC only, which is probably why I haven't noticed it before.  I don't play a whole lot of Dracs.  A handheld NARC makes a degree of sense.  The Strider A, for example, makes a degree of sense.  It's simply to slow though to do what it is supposed to do without getting chewed up.

I'm not extremely familiar with handheld weapons though.  I would think the weight once you include the launcher and a ton of ammo would put the hand held at 4-5 tons which would make it bigger than a mech could hold without penalty or using TSM to make it viable?

With the TW nerf on Infernoes and Frag missiles making them scarcely worth the risk of the bins I'd rather just have the Streaks. Streak renders Narc irrelevant.

What was the nerf exactly, that they simply didn't out right kill non mech units like they used to?  As for Streak rendering NARC irrelevant, I'll have to disagree.  NARC is there for other reason than just simply increase the number of missiles that hit.  Both get a nerf bat from Angel ECM though.  Streak simply gets a nerf while NARC gets negated.  Either way, you have some wasted tonnage.

[massey]

NARC seems like a great little technology to upgrade your reserves inexpensively.  As front line tech, it's not great, but as a cheap upgrade it works fine.

Suppose you're the Star League, and you're leaving a garrison on planet Dirtball V.  You stick a mere 3 regiments of battlemechs there (just a token force, really).  As part of that force, you pull a battalion of Archer 2Rs out of mothballs.  The garrison force isn't likely to face anything with too high a tech level -- the bandits and periphery kingdoms (and even most of the House forces in case they feel froggy) are all using 3025 stuff.  So you put a company of Kintaros with the garrison, and maybe a company or two of vehicles carrying the NARC, and you just leave advanced ammo with them.

Boom.  Suddenly your battalion of old tech mechs has a nice little edge, and you didn't even have to refit them.  All it cost you was a company of medium mechs and now your fire support battalion can fire indirectly without a spotter, and gets better odds of missile hits.  It's not an amazing improvement, but it's not bad at all for basically being free (yeah the ammo is more expensive, but you aren't having to rebuilt battalions of mechs).

When the Inner Sphere found it, it was basically just old Star League tech.  It didn't really suit their modern needs, but they didn't know that at the time.

[Colt Ward]

Huh?  In 3050 its a great way for the IS to counter some of the Clan onslaught since they would be getting more hits and could track that Ice Ferret that is flanking them behind the hill out of sight- if it was NARC'd.  And considering while they had SOME upgraded equipment, they had a lot more old Archers, Crusaders, Catapults, Centurions, Valkyries and other fire support that would get a boost in effectiveness for a mere ammo swap.

Its the external heat cap on mechs IMO, but maybe he is referring to the vehicle insta-kill.  I am fine with vehs not getting instantly killed, but I dislike the heat cap.

[massey]

A lot of Clan machines have ECM, enough that NARC will be unreliable.  Not that they don't have a use for it, but I think it's better as a "bully" technology that helps you to pound weaker opposition.

[The_Caveman]

What was the nerf exactly, that they simply didn't out right kill non mech units like they used to?

Yes, and the change in heat mechanics that made the smaller launchers a lot less useful. It went from a flat +6 heat for 3 turns/missile to +2 heat/missile with no burn time. Used to be, you could have an SRM-equipped bug 'Mech run around and pop Infernos on everything to give your opponent a headache. Now they're a mild inconvenience unless you spam them at a single target. They certainly don't justify the descriptions in the fiction of MWs being outright terrified of them.

It's also kind of silly, on fire is on fire. The heat increase shouldn't vary with the number of hits.

Frag missiles didn't get a direct nerf, but the change in infantry damage mechanics left them out in the cold. They went from 4 troopers killed per missile to 0.8 troopers killed per missile.

As for Streak rendering NARC irrelevant, I'll have to disagree.  NARC is there for other reason than just simply increase the number of missiles that hit.

Huh? When has Narc (aside from the fancy iNarc pods) ever done anything besides a +2 on the missile table?

[Daryk]

Apparently, they decided there was a LOT less gel in each inferno missile to get it down to +2 each.

[Scotty]

It's also kind of silly, on fire is on fire. The heat increase shouldn't vary with the number of hits.

So if I coat my hand with hand sanitizer and light it on fire (fun party trick, incidentally), it's the same thing as if I'm fully engulfed in flame from the waist up? ???  I mean, on fire is on fire.

Frag missiles didn't get a direct nerf, but the change in infantry damage mechanics left them out in the cold. They went from 4 troopers killed per missile to 0.8 troopers killed per missile.

...no.  I just checked my brand new copy of Total Warfare, and Frag Missiles deal their full damage value to the target as if it were dealt by infantry.  That's 2 troopers per missile, with a specific callout that in clear terrain it's still doubled.  That sounds a lot like 4 troopers per missile to me.

Huh? When has Narc (aside from the fancy iNarc pods) ever done anything besides a +2 on the missile table?

A unit that has been NARC'd is always a valid target for indirect fire, even without a spotter.  If you do that there's no +2 to the cluster table, but not requiring a spotter is a big deal.

[Colt Ward]

A lot of Clan machines have ECM, enough that NARC will be unreliable.  Not that they don't have a use for it, but I think it's better as a "bully" technology that helps you to pound weaker opposition.

Actually not too many of the 3050 configs have it- Fire Moth B, Mist Lynx C, Kit Fox C (not sure anyone uses that, AMS issues), Phantom Prime, Black Lanner Prime & A and Hellbringer Prime . . . more configs involved in the Invasion mounted NARC (maybe more than the IS had in 3050-55) and 3 of the ECM configs I cited are pretty Clan specific.

[Sartris]

The massive ecm proliferation is really a late 50s/60s thing. You really feel it by the jihad. Narc and C3 are much more reliable in 3052-3055

[The_Caveman]

So if I coat my hand with hand sanitizer and light it on fire (fun party trick, incidentally), it's the same thing as if I'm fully engulfed in flame from the waist up? ???  I mean, on fire is on fire.

The impression given in the lore is that infernos are delivering a lot more than a little squirt of gel to a small area of the target. Descriptions speak of 'Mechs coated in the stuff from a single SRM-2 volley.

...no.  I just checked my brand new copy of Total Warfare, and Frag Missiles deal their full damage value to the target as if it were dealt by infantry.  That's 2 troopers per missile, with a specific callout that in clear terrain it's still doubled.  That sounds a lot like 4 troopers per missile to me.

Cite, please? That must be a revision, my copy of TW appears to say no such thing.

A unit that has been NARC'd is always a valid target for indirect fire, even without a spotter.  If you do that there's no +2 to the cluster table, but not requiring a spotter is a big deal.

Huh. I don't remember that. Has that always been the case? I just remember Narc granting the +2 on indirect fire with a spotter whereas Artemis needs LOS to function.

EDIT: Just checked the Compendium, it's not in there. So that's an improvement. Narc in the old days had precious little to recommend it. Though SRMs can't indirect-fire in any case, so my point about Streaks beating Narc-SRMs hands-down stands.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

The impression given in the lore is that infernos are delivering a lot more than a little squirt of gel to a small area of the target. Descriptions speak of 'Mechs coated in the stuff from a single SRM-2 volley.

Descriptions from back in the day talk about a Shadow Hawk's cockpit instantly turning into a sauna just from moving, PPCs fusing themselves if they were fired from inside their minimum range, flamers actually being effective in mech-to-mech combat, and plenty of other things that aren't present in the actual game.

Inferno missiles by themselves were really not that scary under the old rules: a flat +6 heat for a few rounds was inconvenient but not enough to really do anything by itself.  Under the current rules, giving someone a concentrated Inferno bath can cause penalties on a mech even if the target itself does nothing.

[The_Caveman]

Descriptions from back in the day talk about a Shadow Hawk's cockpit instantly turning into a sauna just from moving, PPCs fusing themselves if they were fired from inside their minimum range, flamers actually being effective in mech-to-mech combat, and plenty of other things that aren't present in the actual game.

Inferno missiles by themselves were really not that scary under the old rules: a flat +6 heat for a few rounds was inconvenient but not enough to really do anything by itself.  Under the current rules, giving someone a concentrated Inferno bath can cause penalties on a mech even if the target itself does nothing.

Sure, fiction isn't rules, yada yada yada. But the lore creates the context in which the rules exist. Rules changes should have a good reason to depart further from the lore.

+6 heat was definitely a bother when several of the most common heavies and just about anything under 50 tons was stuck with 10 single heatsinks. Even as late as TRO3055 there was an abundance of 'Mechs with marginal heat dissipation. And it's not like the current rules do a single SRM-2 Inferno volley any favors, they just make the brokenness of double heatsinks even more apparent. You now need a 4-pack, preferably a 6, to do the work of a 2 in the old days and 2s are basically relegated to igniting hexes.

And you can't light someone up and shoot 'em while they burn (with SRMs anyway) since you have to keep pegging them with new infernos turn after turn.

[Scotty]

The impression given in the lore is that infernos are delivering a lot more than a little squirt of gel to a small area of the target. Descriptions speak of 'Mechs coated in the stuff from a single SRM-2 volley.

You'll have to clarify how this relates to the assertion that I was specifically taking aim at, namely that "on fire is on fire" and that multiple missiles doing more heat doesn't make sense.  If "on fire is on fire" isn't actually true (and you've agreed that it is not, implicitly, by disagreeing with the analogy I supplied), then the argument is open to "more infernos = coating more of the 'Mech" (the natural progression of the scenario).  Last I checked "a 'Mech's arm" doesn't qualify as a small area in any except a hyperbolic sense.

As it turns out, I don't particularly care what early fluff said about infernos.  Early fluff also told us that Hesperus II was a massive spare parts stockpile, that 'Mechs were utterly irreplaceble for any reason, and that raids were conducted between planetary bodies with interstellar spaceships over clean water.

Cite, please? That must be a revision, my copy of TW appears to say no such thing.

Total Warfare, pg. 141, Special Munitions.  Atlas cover version.

Huh. I don't remember that. Has that always been the case? I just remember Narc granting the +2 on indirect fire with a spotter whereas Artemis needs LOS to function.

EDIT: Just checked the Compendium, it's not in there. So that's an improvement. Narc in the old days had precious little to recommend it. Though SRMs can't indirect-fire in any case, so my point about Streaks beating Narc-SRMs hands-down stands.

The argument is that a NARC launcher benefits SRMs and also LRMs carried by any 'Mech in a force.  Streaks only augment themselves.  One NARC launcher provides benefit to an arbitrarily large number of standard SRMs.  Ergo, Streaks are not universally more useful than Narc-Capable SRMs.

[The_Caveman]

You'll have to clarify how this relates to the assertion that I was specifically taking aim at, namely that "on fire is on fire" and that multiple missiles doing more heat doesn't make sense.  If "on fire is on fire" isn't actually true (and you've agreed that it is not, implicitly, by disagreeing with the analogy I supplied), then the argument is open to "more infernos = coating more of the 'Mech" (the natural progression of the scenario).  Last I checked "a 'Mech's arm" doesn't qualify as a small area in any except a hyperbolic sense.

If by "taking aim" you mean being pedantic. It should be clear to anyone with a smidge of common sense that when I said "on fire is on fire" it wasn't in reference to an apples-to-oranges comparison of a hand vs the full body.

If the 'Mech is doused in inferno gel, the implication is not that one arm got a little splashed. These things spray a wide enough area to set an entire 30m hex ablaze instantly. Adding more missiles is not going to greatly increase the coverage and in any case the fuel can only be consumed so quickly.

As it turns out, I don't particularly care what early fluff said about infernos.

There is no need for you to get snippy. This is a consistent depiction in the fiction with a 30-year history and was alive and well in the 3060s-era novels. The last ones I particularly cared to read.

Total Warfare, pg. 141, Special Munitions.  Atlas cover version.

Then my older copy reads differently. It only mentions the doubled damage and clear/woods special case, nothing about calculating base damage differently. Good to know this oversight has been addressed in errata.

The argument is that a NARC launcher benefits SRMs and also LRMs carried by any 'Mech in a force.  Streaks only augment themselves.  One NARC launcher provides benefit to an arbitrarily large number of standard SRMs.

And none of this provides a convincing reason to carry standard SRMs vs Streaks. Carrying Narc to benefit LRM carriers is its own beast (and with the IDF improvements, makes vastly more sense than using it for SRMs) and has no bearing on Narc-augmented SRM vs Streak SRM. Introducing LRMs vs SRMs into the equation widens the scope far beyond the original discussion.