Register Register

Author Topic: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft  (Read 916 times)

Xochi

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • Three strengths he gave us.
C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« on: 14 January 2019, 00:42:55 »
I am just curious as I cannot seem to find a ruleset for this.

If an Atmo Aircraft has C3M (like a Zug) are ground units always considered to be in sight of the master?

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #1 on: 14 January 2019, 00:57:26 »
I'm pretty sure that in CBT/board game BattleTech that C3Ms that are not on the map cannot contribute to a network.

If AS never repeats that, it's 99%+ probable it works the same way as in CBT/board game BattleTech.

EDIT: In looking at the rules since I posted my initial take, I think it's more of a question of "what says you CAN use offboard C3Ms in an on-board network" than "what says you CAN'T".  The Abstract Aerospace rules never grant the ability for C3 networks to work.. contrasted against Naval C3 which is given allowance to work.

EDIT EDIT: There is the rule that says for C3 network to be working you have to be able to draw LOS that is unaffected by hostile ECM from slave to master, and even if there's no ECM in play it's prima facie that there's no LOS possible from a point inside the playing area to a C3M at any point outside the playing area.
« Last Edit: 14 January 2019, 02:29:11 by Tai Dai Cultist »

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 33332
  • Divided States of SMASH
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #2 on: 14 January 2019, 12:01:48 »
What he said. I'm 99.999% certain that for a MeVogel to be part of a C3 network, it must land, and stay landed for the duration. I'd ask in the Rules Forum, this may simply be a writer oversight that needs to be corrected.
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"The BT universe is startlingly deficient in both wisdom and hindsight." - Cray
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer

AdmiralObvious

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 223
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #3 on: 14 January 2019, 22:19:16 »
Last I checked, any ASF or fixed wing can't actually use the C3 network functionality unless they land.

A VTOL is a different story, but an ASF can't connect its C3 to ground units in flight.

DarkJaguar

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 220
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #4 on: 15 January 2019, 00:48:11 »
Yes, it works.

Quote from: Alpha Strike p.55
Step 1: Verify Line of Sight
An Airborne aerospace unit always has LOS to a ground unit unless the ground unit is completely submerged, underground or inside a structure. While submerged units and units concealed by structures may not be targeted directly, the spot they occupy may be chosen for a bombing attack.

Nothing in C3 refers to only being usable by ground units, or the units being on the same map.  Only that they must have LOS, and ECM must not interfere.  An airborne aerospace "always has LOS to a ground unit unless..." means that as long as it is airborne, C3 will work.
« Last Edit: 15 January 2019, 00:50:38 by DarkJaguar »

AdmiralObvious

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 223
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #5 on: 15 January 2019, 01:25:44 »
Huh... I double checked the Total Warfare rules apparently, it does work. Then I had a look at the Errata to be sure, and apparently you don't even need LOS at all as long as the blocker isn't water or a building.

I think I can call shenanigans based on what map the aircraft is on though. I'm not sure if "I'm in space, but I can still see the Scimitar" counts as LOS.
« Last Edit: 15 January 2019, 01:43:24 by AdmiralObvious »

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #6 on: 15 January 2019, 01:41:53 »
...

Nothing in C3 refers to only being usable by ground units, or the units being on the same map.  Only that they must have LOS, and ECM must not interfere.  An airborne aerospace "always has LOS to a ground unit unless..." means that as long as it is airborne, C3 will work.

I have a few quibbles with your rules lawyering.  Not that you're doing it; but that you're doing it in a flawed way :)

1: "Nothing in C3 refers to only being usable by ground units" is a faulty claim. C3 is a part of the Standard Alpha Strike rules.  The Abstract Aerospace system is not part of the Standard Alpha Strike Rules.  There's no basis in saying anything carries over from one to the other unless there's evidence supporting that it does.  And aside from Naval C3, there's no allowance for C3 in the aerospace rules.

2: The citation you gave (verifying line of sight for air to ground attacks) is poor support for your argument.  An aero unit must necessarily be in the Central zone when accomplishing that step, which means your best case scenario is the aero unit can only participate in a C3 network while in the central zone.
« Last Edit: 15 January 2019, 01:43:53 by Tai Dai Cultist »

AdmiralObvious

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 223
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #7 on: 15 January 2019, 01:49:04 »
And aside from Naval C3, there's no allowance for C3 in the aerospace rules.

I think this might actually be the answer. Airships, fixed wing aircraft, as well as aerospace and conventional fighters follow aerospace rules.

So, basically, you can't have a C3 network unless you're flying a Small craft, or  bigger, and those don't connect to ground based C3.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #8 on: 15 January 2019, 02:01:00 »
Xochi asked the question on the rules forum, so if what's been said upthread doesn't solve it one way or the other we'll eventually have an official answer.

DarkJaguar

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 220
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #9 on: 15 January 2019, 02:28:00 »
I have a few quibbles with your rules lawyering.  Not that you're doing it; but that you're doing it in a flawed way :)

1: "Nothing in C3 refers to only being usable by ground units" is a faulty claim. C3 is a part of the Standard Alpha Strike rules.  The Abstract Aerospace system is not part of the Standard Alpha Strike Rules.  There's no basis in saying anything carries over from one to the other unless there's evidence supporting that it does.  And aside from Naval C3, there's no allowance for C3 in the aerospace rules.

2: The citation you gave (verifying line of sight for air to ground attacks) is poor support for your argument.  An aero unit must necessarily be in the Central zone when accomplishing that step, which means your best case scenario is the aero unit can only participate in a C3 network while in the central zone.

1:  Abstract Aerospace is standard rules, so that's a moot point.

2:  While true, it doesn't say "While on the Central Zone, an airborne aerospace always has LOS", it says "An Airborne Aerospace always has LOS".  That statement being made in the section for air-2-ground attacks notwithstanding, there is certainly precedence for it working the other way around (See air-defense arrow IV's on p. 76 for an example of this).

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10313
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #10 on: 15 January 2019, 03:05:29 »
There is no LOS on the radar map because you can't draw a line where there is no board.  ADA AIV and Flak Artillery are artillery attacks and don't need LOS in the first place. They can't be used to justify that interpretation.

C3 doesn't work between airborne aerospace units and ground units.  And since C3 must be designated at the start of the game, the only way you can use the Zugvogel's C3M is if it remains on the ground map the entire time.

If you need an explanation: because an untouchable, unjammable C3M orbiting the outer ring is stupid from a gameplay perspective and has no place here.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

DarkJaguar

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 220
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #11 on: 15 January 2019, 04:17:23 »
ADA AIV and Flak Artillery are artillery attacks and don't need LOS in the first place.

Quote from: Alpha Strike p. 76 w/ errata
Air-Defense Arrow IV
Air-Defense Arrow IV missiles require the ART-AC or ARTAIS specials.
These missiles may be used to deliver direct-fire ground-to air attacks against any airborne targets in the Central Zone or Inner Ring on the Radar Map. Unlike standard artillery attacks, air-defense Arrow attacks may not be made in the same turn the firing unit executes a standard weapon or physical attack. Resolve all damage from a successful Air-Defense Arrow IV attack during the Combat Phase in which it is fired.
In place of artillery attack rules, air-defense Arrow’s are resolved as standard ground-to-air weapon attacks (see Ground to Air Combat, p. 60). If the target is in the Inner Ring, the range is Long. If the target is in the Central Zone, measure the distance from the attacker to the target’s flight path (do not include any adjustment for altitude). If the flight path is at or within 24”, the range is Short. If the flight path is more than 24” from the attacker, the range is Medium. An additional –2 tohit modifier is then applied to represent the improved homing capabilities of the Arrow missiles.
Air-defense Arrow IVs may not target ground units (including grounded aerospace units), nor may they target airborne units beyond the Inner Ring on the Radar Map. Air-defense Arrow IVs will not scatter on a missed attack. The damage value for an airdefense Arrow IV is 2 points. Airdefense Arrow IV missiles do not deliver area of effect damage.
This is literally stated to be a direct fire ground to air attack (in place of an artillery attack, so it's also not an artillery attack).  Direct fire requires LOS, it has range brackets outlined and everything.

C3 doesn't work between airborne aerospace units and ground units.

Can you cite a page number for this statement please?

If you need an explanation: because an untouchable, unjammable C3M orbiting the outer ring is stupid from a gameplay perspective and has no place here.

It's only untouchable if you refuse to bring aerospace, so in other words...

« Last Edit: 15 January 2019, 04:22:50 by DarkJaguar »

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #12 on: 15 January 2019, 12:14:01 »
...
Can you cite a page number for this statement please?
...

I was gonna stay out of the thread as opinions have clearly entrenched and the only possible answer that could satisfy would be an official ruling.  However I do want to again point out faulty argument.

As a general rule in logic/debate, the onus isn't on proving a negative.  Noone can prove that there's no rule saying C3 can extend from the playing area to the radar map, except by citing the entirety of the two rulebooks and two errata documents and saying "see, it's not there!".

The onus is on the claim affirming a positive.  Your claim, in this case, is that C3 networks CAN bridge the playing area to the radar map.  The lack of a rule saying you can't isn't the same thing as a rule saying that you can. You must find a citation that grants units governed by the Abstract Aerospace rules the ability to participate in a C3 network. 

At any rate, all you've proved is that units performing abstract aerospace system air to ground attacks have LOS to units in the playing area.  That's a non sequitur as it has nothing to do with C3.
« Last Edit: 15 January 2019, 12:27:50 by Tai Dai Cultist »

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10313
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #13 on: 15 January 2019, 13:44:45 »
What that interpretation actually does is allow a C3 Master on an airborne aerospace unit to connect units on the ground map with each other in a package totally immune from ground attacks and ECM.

Which is why even if there is some tiny sliver of validity in that interpretation (I remain unconvinced, for reasons you touched on) I intend to see that obviously unintended consequence stamped firmly out by errata.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

DarkJaguar

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 220
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #14 on: 15 January 2019, 14:29:00 »
I was gonna stay out of the thread as opinions have clearly entrenched and the only possible answer that could satisfy would be an official ruling.  However I do want to again point out faulty argument.

As a general rule in logic/debate, the onus isn't on proving a negative.  Noone can prove that there's no rule saying C3 can extend from the playing area to the radar map, except by citing the entirety of the two rulebooks and two errata documents and saying "see, it's not there!".

The onus is on the claim affirming a positive.  Your claim, in this case, is that C3 networks CAN bridge the playing area to the radar map.  The lack of a rule saying you can't isn't the same thing as a rule saying that you can. You must find a citation that grants units governed by the Abstract Aerospace rules the ability to participate in a C3 network. 

At any rate, all you've proved is that units performing abstract aerospace system air to ground attacks have LOS to units in the playing area.  That's a non sequitur as it has nothing to do with C3.
Ah, but I can cite a page number that states the conditions for losing a C3 network.  None of them say "Is an aerospace" or "Is on the atmosphere map".  Only that they have LoS, which I have provided I think, 3 examples of in the book that say airborne aerospace have LoS to every ground unit, and Vice versa?
Quote from: Alpha Strike p.51
Losing a C3 Network
For standard C3 networks (those with C3M, C3EM, C3RS, and C3S specials), a network member will lose its connection to the network if a hostile ECM bubble covers that member, or blocks its line of sight to the network’s “master” unit. The destruction or shutdown of any C3 unit also removes that unit from its network, but will not affect the entire network unless the destroyed/shutdown unit is the network’s “master”. If the unit destroyed or shutdown is the network’s “master” unit, the entire network—and all active members of it—will lose the benefits of C3.

What that interpretation actually does is allow a C3 Master on an airborne aerospace unit to connect units on the ground map with each other in a package totally immune from ground attacks and ECM.

Which is why even if there is some tiny sliver of validity in that interpretation (I remain unconvinced, for reasons you touched on) I intend to see that obviously unintended consequence stamped firmly out by errata.
two things:  First, the network can still be taken down with ECM, you just can't interpose ECM between the master and slave unit (Can we rename these to "Server" and "Client" please?  It's 2019 ffs, even the tech industry is changing nomenclature for networks)
Secondly, a wise man once said...
...When you bring up a potential balance issue, if the issue can be solved by something in every player's toolbox then it's not actually a balance issue...
Bring your own aerospace to shoot down the Master.  Otherwise
...I suggested that if you're going to ignore the obvious counter that it's going to become an issue.  That's on the player, not the rules.
The only errata that's needed, is the one to make it explicitly clear that this is possible.
« Last Edit: 15 January 2019, 14:38:02 by DarkJaguar »

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10313
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #15 on: 15 January 2019, 14:37:02 »
I'm certain you're very much aware of the difference in context between the two circumstances.  In this particular case (for reasons I went into at length in a thread a while back I can't reasonably expect people to know existed), there are enough interactions in the air game that it's entirely possible to create a situation where there isn't a fix handy in every player's toolbox.  The way thrust in engagement rolls and even initiative on the radar map means that a deliberately built unit can make itself functionally immortal in the skies with no counter.

That's a problem I (unsuccessfully) argued against from another time, but in this case since the Inability to effectively deal with a target also includes perfect protection for a C3 unit I think it's a little more important to fix.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

AdmiralObvious

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 223
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #16 on: 15 January 2019, 14:39:05 »
OtherwiseThe only errata that's needed, is the one to make it explicitly clear that this not intended to be possible.
The issue is that it's not supposed to be possible.

The answer "just kill the master" isn't really a valid answer when all the other roles for obstruction go out the window based on the platform.

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10313
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #17 on: 15 January 2019, 14:48:38 »
To illustrate the issue, I would be interested in hearing how you would approach neutralizing a C3M on a fighter with thrust 12a that doesn't want to engage.

We can figure out the average number of turns required to successfully do that for a number of different methods.  It's really a subject I enjoy exploring, especially for aero units.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

DarkJaguar

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 220
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #18 on: 15 January 2019, 14:49:10 »
I'm certain you're very much aware of the difference in context between the two circumstances.  In this particular case (for reasons I went into at length in a thread a while back I can't reasonably expect people to know existed), there are enough interactions in the air game that it's entirely possible to create a situation where there isn't a fix handy in every player's toolbox.  The way thrust in engagement rolls and even initiative on the radar map means that a deliberately built unit can make itself functionally immortal in the skies with no counter.

That's a problem I (unsuccessfully) argued against from another time, but in this case since the Inability to effectively deal with a target also includes perfect protection for a C3 unit I think it's a little more important to fix.
What interactions would those be?  If you want to shoot down something in the air something like this is pretty inexpensive, and it moves 2 zones, so the Zugvogel isn't going to get away from it.
You mentioned custom units?  Well that's always problematic, but that's not in standard rules, so it can be ignored.
How about you ECM the unit on the ground?  you've only got to be 12" away from it, so if you have ECM, your opponent isn't going to get better than medium range out of their C3 anyway.
Putting a C3 "Server" on an aerospace is a far cry from "perfect" protection, and saying that "initiative" makes a C3 Server effectively immortal just because it's aerospace is a pretty weak reason to nerf something that exists in the fluff of the referenced unit (Yes, I know fluff aren't rules, but why make an errata just to contradict the fluff?).

The issue is that it's not supposed to be possible.

The answer "just kill the master" isn't really a valid answer when all the other roles for obstruction go out the window based on the platform.

ECM the "Client"


To illustrate the issue, I would be interested in hearing how you would approach neutralizing a C3M on a fighter with thrust 12a that doesn't want to engage.

We can figure out the average number of turns required to successfully do that for a number of different methods.  It's really a subject I enjoy exploring, especially for aero units.

No such unit exists, so you're bringing customs into a standard rules argument.  Beyond that, ECM THE CLIENT UNIT.
« Last Edit: 15 January 2019, 14:52:01 by DarkJaguar »

DarkJaguar

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 220
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #19 on: 15 January 2019, 14:50:57 »
double post, delete me.

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10313
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #20 on: 15 January 2019, 14:57:04 »
We're discussing the problematic rules interaction; anything custom that I can make may end up existing in a future product.  The idea is to prove the concept is exploitable, and subsequently remove the concept. If you disagree that the concept can be exploited it therefore falls on me to prove that it can be.  Such a proof is not particularly difficult to come by.

(I really am interested in showing why aero is an arena uniquely protected from most forms of interaction if you use it 'correctly'.  It's a fairly complex answer)

EDIT: as a serious question, how long do you think it would take that interceptor to remove the Zig from play?  The answer may surprise you!

It is almost certainly 15+ turns.
« Last Edit: 15 January 2019, 15:01:52 by Scotty »
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

AdmiralObvious

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 223
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #21 on: 15 January 2019, 15:09:11 »
What interactions would those be?  If you want to shoot down something in the air something like this is pretty inexpensive, and it moves 2 zones, so the Zugvogel isn't going to get away from it.
You mentioned custom units?  Well that's always problematic, but that's not in standard rules, so it can be ignored.
How about you ECM the unit on the ground?  you've only got to be 12" away from it, so if you have ECM, your opponent isn't going to get better than medium range out of their C3 anyway.
Putting a C3 "Server" on an aerospace is a far cry from "perfect" protection, and saying that "initiative" makes a C3 Server effectively immortal just because it's aerospace is a pretty weak reason to nerf something that exists in the fluff of the referenced unit (Yes, I know fluff aren't rules, but why make an errata just to contradict the fluff?).

ECM the "Client"


No such unit exists, so you're bringing customs into a standard rules argument.  Beyond that, ECM THE CLIENT UNIT.

You're ignoring the issue that the master is LITERALLY invincible to ECM in this case. That's the best way to bring down a C3 network. Blocking the client works... sure, but the rest of the network won't care because you can't touch the master with ECM.
« Last Edit: 15 January 2019, 15:11:49 by AdmiralObvious »

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 33332
  • Divided States of SMASH
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #22 on: 15 January 2019, 15:10:57 »
Things are getting heated in here. I'd like to request that everyone step away from the thread for a while and calm down. At the least, wait until the Rules Forum question has been answered. C:-)
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"The BT universe is startlingly deficient in both wisdom and hindsight." - Cray
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer

DarkJaguar

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 220
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #23 on: 15 January 2019, 15:16:59 »
We're discussing the problematic rules interaction; anything custom that I can make may end up existing in a future product.  The idea is to prove the concept is exploitable, and subsequently remove the concept. If you disagree that the concept can be exploited it therefore falls on me to prove that it can be.  Such a proof is not particularly difficult to come by.
It's only exploitable
if you're going to ignore the obvious counter
i.e. ECM THE CLIENT
EDIT: as a serious question, how long do you think it would take that interceptor to remove the Zig from play?  The answer may surprise you!
It is almost certainly 15+ turns.
It is also as short as 3 turns certainly.  Killing the Server isn't the only way to negate C3 bonuses though, you could always ECM THE CLIENT.
You're ignoring the issue that the master is LITERALLY invincible to ECM in this case. That's the best way to bring down a C3 network. Blocking the client works... sure, but the rest of the network won't care because you can't touch the master with ECM.
The only benefit you gain from C3 is the range modifier of the nearest unit in proximity.  If you ECM the client, even though the network still "exists", you've still negated the benefits.  Furthermore, there's up to 4 Servers in a network, if your opponent puts all 4 of them on the atmosphere map, then they are down a whole 108PV.  If you lose a fight in which you have a 108PV advantage, the problem isn't the C3 network.  If they don't put those 108PV off the board and out of reach, then guess what...you can target those servers instead if you want!

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Global Moderator
  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 33332
  • Divided States of SMASH
Re: C3M on Atmospheric Aircraft
« Reply #24 on: 15 January 2019, 15:20:04 »
...and now you know why moderators rarely try being polite - this is the kind of result they usually get.
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"It's just that the Hegemony had one answer to every naval problem. 'I kills it with my battleships.'" - Liam's Ghost
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"The BT universe is startlingly deficient in both wisdom and hindsight." - Cray
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer