Have to ask: Who uses LAMs?

[RifleMech]

I've been working to play around with LAMs more.  One of things I don't like about the original canon trio is that they're not the most ideal battlemechs, except for any variant of the Phoenix Hawk LAM.  I've taken it upon myself to make some custom house-flavored LAMs that use introtech.  And now I'm about to dive into more custom stuff that ignores their current tech limitations, like no endo, FF, or XL engines.

I never had a problem with the originals although I did wonder why they were never upgraded with recovered technology before the Clan Invasion. As for the rest, have fun!  :thumbsup:


 

[abou]

Yeah, I'm beginning to see it. And the construction limitations further hurt LAMs. I can see not having XL engines, but it is too bad about stuff like endo steel or even stealth armor.

LAMs still seem to be a boon in the pre-Clan era. Especially in a game where aerospace assets aren't used frequently. Zipping around the field and sniping at opponents or just taking up their attention is probably a good strategy. But once the Clans come along... well, as Weirdo said with pulse lasers. The ridiculous range advantage the large pulse has over most IS tech AND a -2 bonus and that's all folks.

[Major Headcase]

Back in the 90s (we played 4th SW period w/some advanced weapons but no Clan-tech) was the last time I used LAMs. My group was in a long running RPG/BT campaign and we capped our units at what we could cram in one Union class dropship each (starting from 1 lance, so it took a while!) And instead of buying a pair of Slayer ASFs like everyone else did, I bought 2 PHX LAMs.
I liked their mobility to redeploy, but I basically just played them as 2 extra mechs. Not very creative but it worked. I never used them vs the other players fighters, I always kept them on the ground if enemy fighters were in the game.
RPG-wise they came in very handy! For missions where I needed to send forces long distance fast; showing up with two medium weight transforming mechs instead of infantry in hover trucks, won me a few vital side missions!!

[Weirdo]

Sounds like you used them in EXACTLY the way they're meant to be used. :thumbsup:

[RifleMech]

Yeah the range of Clan weapons along with targeting computers made life very difficult for LAMs. Not that it's always been easy. At least in universe. Even when SLDF tech was lost there was still AA and other targeting systems and flak ammo. More modern tech has just made life more dangerous for LAMs and given them more competition. I still think there's a place for LAMs but their pilots will definitely be earning their paychecks.

[BATTLEMASTER]

Yeah the range of Clan weapons along with targeting computers made life very difficult for LAMs.

To be fair, any weapon or quirk that reduces TH numbers hurts everything that relied on speed for armor.  The best way to defeat that is use speed to break LOS for a turn, then use the following turn to go offensive, ideally in mech mode.

[RifleMech]

To be fair, any weapon or quirk that reduces TH numbers hurts everything that relied on speed for armor.  The best way to defeat that is use speed to break LOS for a turn, then use the following turn to go offensive, ideally in mech mode.

True but the range of Clan weapons is a threat on it's own.

[Cannonshop]

I remember back in the day, and we're talking "Compendium Rules of Warfare" days and earlier, when the Clans were new, Mike Stackpole hadn't written most of the Wolf novels yet, and TRO:3050 was fresh off the printers.

I remember a couple people bragging about how they could 'own' Clan forces using LAMs.

This...didn't really work out on the tabletop, even back then.  Yes, against a poor player using Clan units, LAMs could be overpowering, but then, when you had a good player using random inner sphere 'mechs against a poor player using Clantech, you could get the same results.  Minus the Harmony Gold lawsuits, LAMs might well have been gradually improved through the rules and construction options over the succeeding decades the way other units that were NOT hit with it improved...but that wasn't the case.  It didn't work out that way, when LAM rules were brought back?

The Devs had to work with half-remembered past, rumours of supremely OP Land Air Munchkins and plowing through six successive sets of core rules and development to do the job.

They did the best they could in the circumstances.

[Col Toda]

At a guess 5 percent of the players I have encountered used them at all ever . Only one regularly . It is a niche unit . The fewer units on the board the better they were. .

[RifleMech]

I agree that the quality of players will get different game results.  I also agree that LAMs could have been upgraded had things gone differently. However, if they hadn't been downgraded in first place upgrading wouldn't be necessary. Originally LAMs didn't have tech restrictions. Of course that and less than clear rules concerning the LAM's AirMech Mode movement is what led to munchkins and players hating LAMs in the first place.

The last "core" rule book to contain LAMs was The BattleTech Compendium in 1990. In 1994 BattleTech Compendium: The Rules of Warfare was published without LAMs. LAMs were moved to Tactical Handbook in 1994. LAM rules wouldn't appear again until 2010 in Record Sheets: 3085 Print Ed. It was another six years before LAMs were in a core rule book with Interstellar Operations in 2016. So I wouldn't say that there was a lot of rule books concerning LAMs for Devs to go over.

Don't get me wrong. I am very thankful and very glad that not only did the Devs bring LAMs back but that they gave us a lot more LAMs to play with. I even like the newer rules. For the most part. I was even okay with the AirMech's aerospace targeting modifiers even though the official reason "moving so fast" made no sense and isn't bared out in the rules or game play. I have a more simpler and logical reason in my head. Some of the prohibited construction items come under WT!? but I can deal. The Turn Modes in IO though were clearly to nerf AirMechs and placate the LAM haters. And at the time there were a lot of haters. Pretty much every LAM thread ended locked. So I can understand the Devs placating players. I don't like it but I understand it.

Now, the attitude concerning LAMs is so much nicer. Yes, there's still those who don't like LAMs. Which is okay but the attitude isn't "LAMs and those who use them must die and burn in the deepest parts of hell!" Now it's, "I don't want to use them but if it works for your game." Which is great! I am thrilled with how different things are now. I'm choosing to be optimistic in that one day that LAMs won't be intentionally nerfed and that they can be upgraded with even more advanced tech. I'd really love to see stats for the TLDF's Urbanmech LAM one day.

So yay Devs!  :thumbsup: :beer: :clap:

And now for a silly question. Does anyone, besides me, use the Shadow Hawk LAM or other homebrewed BiModal LAMs?

[truetanker]

I have a DA unit, while mixtech and as such is considered a custom, a Phoenix Hawk HK1 *...

Basically it has nothing changed, but upgraded the weapons suite to clantech... the Mediums went Heavy, but other than that...

Same armor, same speed, same fuel... just upgraded the weapons a bit.

The other players kinda groaned when I placed it on the field, until they realized it was just being used in a secondline unit.

I was playing a short lived Snow Raven Star, had no choice, so I made the few modifications before the game and well while I did have fun popping 10 pointers with high attacks...

Lesson learn : Before play, ask if you can play with an aeromap next to the ground one... or consider going to aero-mode to allow longer loiter time...

Zoom as an aero, single attacks every third turn, but you have to state which path the turn before...

Even if you AirMech most of the time, Level 2+ hides you...

TT
( * And no, I lost the game, but it allowed me to field a LAM on an otherwise LAM-less field. )

[Weirdo]

Lesson learn : Before play, ask if you can play with an aeromap next to the ground one... or consider going to aero-mode to allow longer loiter time...

Zoom as an aero, single attacks every third turn, but you have to state which path the turn before...

What on earth ruleset are you using that cripples Aeros like that?!? ???

[truetanker]

What on earth ruleset are you using that cripples Aeros like that?!? ???

Old BMRr...

I missed on a Strafe run with 2 HMLs, changed and landed, but got a hit from the ERL on the Secondary target hit. Took some LRM-10 damage, even after I had landed behind a Level 1 Hill and a friendly fired Smoke round to attempt to hide me from any incoming fire.

My suggestion is, if you come screaming across the ground map in Aero form, you can change modes during the physical round. ( The secondary target was during Fire Phase, I changed during Physical Phase and consider myself landed, or in " Hover Mode " aka AirMech. )

The rules at the time where all over the place... We had to go to the really old rules, Rules of Warfare, Blue book with Atlas... so AT1... but we used the combat of the Aero and Mech rules. We kinda house ruled that you could change Modes only during the Physical phase, but combat was same in BMRr. Other than that house rule, it was smooth-ish. ( Some things did come up... vs. Inferno round, vs. Artillery in AirMode ( we did 1/2 damage as air burst - Arrow launched < roll for location and apply > ) and my worst enemy vs. DFA... Since I was technically hovering... damage was split in two, roll for location... < Yes... I had a Firestarter-O-R DFA me... it hurt and I crashed and was displaced and he did flamed me after that as I was sleeping from the pilot roll > )

Hope this helped,
TT

[Weirdo]

Have you given any thoughts to using the actual current rules, for Aeros or Airmechs? You'll find it a vastly different experience.

[BATTLEMASTER]

And now for a silly question. Does anyone, besides me, use the Shadow Hawk LAM or other homebrewed BiModal LAMs?

The only benefits I see to bi-modal LAMs is that they allow for atmospheric insertion of battlemechs without drop pods and being able to provide air support in a pinch for a force that doesn't otherwise have access to flying combat units.  They do this for a reduced conversion equipment tonnage penalty. 

I like the regular tri-modal LAMs the most because the airmech mode is a huge help with getting a unit from one place on the map to another very quickly.  Sure, you can do that with just an aerospace fighter mode too, but then you take two extra turns to take off and land, PSR checks for said take-off and landing, and any additional lawndart checks for damage taken during the flight across the map.  The movement also isn't as precise since a thrust point moves you sixteen hexes on the ground map with no ability to land between that movement range.

That being said, bi-modal LAMs have a strategic advantage, while conventional tri-modal LAMs have both a strategic and tactical advantage.

[RifleMech]

The only benefits I see to bi-modal LAMs is that they allow for atmospheric insertion of battlemechs without drop pods and being able to provide air support in a pinch for a force that doesn't otherwise have access to flying combat units.  They do this for a reduced conversion equipment tonnage penalty. 

I like the regular tri-modal LAMs the most because the airmech mode is a huge help with getting a unit from one place on the map to another very quickly.  Sure, you can do that with just an aerospace fighter mode too, but then you take two extra turns to take off and land, PSR checks for said take-off and landing, and any additional lawndart checks for damage taken during the flight across the map.  The movement also isn't as precise since a thrust point moves you sixteen hexes on the ground map with no ability to land between that movement range.

That being said, bi-modal LAMs have a strategic advantage, while conventional tri-modal LAMs have both a strategic and tactical advantage.

Other than BiModal Conversion Equipment actually weighs more, 15% to TriModal's 10%, I agree. They're useful but not as useful as TriModal LAMs. I still happily use them though. I'd be nice if there were more canon BiModal LAMs though. Maybe if there's another Boondoggle TRO.

[BATTLEMASTER]

Other than BiModal Conversion Equipment actually weighs more, 15% to TriModal's 10%, I agree. They're useful but not as useful as TriModal LAMs.

Totally wish the conversion equipment percentage was how I remembered it  ;D

[RifleMech]

Totally wish the conversion equipment percentage was how I remembered it  ;D

Me Too!  ;D :thumbsup:

[truetanker]

Have you given any thoughts to using the actual current rules, for Aeros or Airmechs? You'll find it a vastly different experience.

I have, but haven't found anyone that would allow LAMs on board... stiff fright of the rules. ( Yes, stiff resistance! )

So... I make them more scared of me via my zaniness! It's a tradeoff.  >:D

TT

[Taliserian]

We play A Time Of War in the 3030's as a mech lance.  I told the GM I wanted to do something a little different and with his approval made an acrobatic display / airshow performer with a modified Phoenix Hawk LAM.  It's essentially a custom design we refer to as the 'Superhawk'.

It's a Belter design; though the rest of the group simply thinks she's from a jumpship family.

The GM and I agreed that "handheld" weaponry could be stowed on external hard points as one sees in the source of the original designs.  The only 'illegal' thing about her loadout is the use of a Light AC2 before they were officially introduced; but it's a really simple technological development (Hey, Bob.  What if we put less barrel on it?).

In our headcanon, the GM and I decided that the Belters don't use conventional Battlemechs at all.  It's less a "Let's make this mech fly" approach that the Star League took, and more a "Let's make this fighter walk".

There have been plenty of times in the campaign so far when the ability to get up and move has proved invaluable.  But also a fair share where I've had to hunker down in cover and slog it out.  It's not what she's designed to do, and she's suffered for it; but it's been a fair tradeoff for a chance to do something unique.

[Terminax]

They pop up now and again here. Like all the extended universe stuff, they get less use because of the cumbersome additional and sometimes confusing rules more than anything else these days. There's a couple of the usual stereotypes who love themselves some LAMs because of video games or nostalgic reasons but they usually don't make pests of themselves.

[Daryk]

I'm a little surprised there was never a Bi-Modal LAM that was ASF and Air-Mech... that would make a lot of sense too!  8)

[Mendrugo]

I'm a little surprised there was never a Bi-Modal LAM that was ASF and Air-Mech... that would make a lot of sense too!  8)

Well, there was the Banshee which folded at a 90 degree angle for highly improbable VTOL capabilities in the cartoon.

[RifleMech]

I'm a little surprised there was never a Bi-Modal LAM that was ASF and Air-Mech... that would make a lot of sense too!  8)

That would be interesting.  >:D

Well, there was the Banshee which folded at a 90 degree angle for highly improbable VTOL capabilities in the cartoon.

Ooo!   That reminds of the circular wing ASF thread. Definate proof tail sitters exist in BT. Thanks  :thumbsup:

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Remember that the cartoon is considered to be fiction in-universe.

[RifleMech]

Remember that the cartoon is considered to be fiction in-universe.

True but the Banshee is canon and appears in XTRO:Boondoggles.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Yes, but that doesn't mean that its tail-landing ability is canon.  That could just be something that was done for the cartoon, like the elevators coming out of the bottom of the mechs so that the pilots don't have to climb up to the cockpit and can instead somehow travel through the center of the engine.

[RifleMech]

Yes, but that doesn't mean that its tail-landing ability is canon.  That could just be something that was done for the cartoon, like the elevators coming out of the bottom of the mechs so that the pilots don't have to climb up to the cockpit and can instead somehow travel through the center of the engine.

The Banshee's cockpit does rotates and it does have VTOL equipment on top of what an ASF would normally have. I don't know why both and especially the latter, couldn't represent the Banshee sitting on it's tail.

Also the Crab can eject the pilot out of the rear of the mech so a collapsible elevator through the mech isn't too far fetched.