ER Blazer Cannon

[Daryk]

Dang it, I could have sworn this had come up before, but my searching of the forum yielded zilch.  So... here's what I think is a logical progression for my favorite weapon...

Code: [Select]

Heat Damage Range Weight Space Tech Level
 24        12 0/7/14/19    9   4      E

[DevianID]

It's definately hot.  I agree it's the logical result of 'Blazer' + ER.  When paired with a Gauss its probably fine, but the HPPC is practically cheating compared to this ER Blazer.  Blazers always made sense as a low tech solution, so it feels at odds taking ER lasers and slaping a low tech solution to them.

Now, a 'Pulse' Blazer has the same problem, but we have a few paired large pulse and ER large mechs like the Grand Titan and Toyama that might appreciate an ER or Pulse Blazer.

[Daryk]

I think its only real application is on aerospace craft for thresholding at long range (which was the discussion that brought me back around to this idea)... :)

[Tyler Jorgensson]

I expected two ER Large Lasers slapped together and I’m a little disappointed

[Daryk]

That's... exactly what it is?  With stats mirroring the regular one with increased heat and range?

[Hellraiser]

Seems perfectly balanced in that you gave it ERLL ranges & then added 50% to heat.

I agree that I'm not sure I'd EVER use it, LOL,  soooo HOT.

Interestingly the idea of a PULSE Blazer kind of tingles me.

Code: [Select]

Heat Damage Range Weight Space Tech Level
 20        14 0/3/7/10    12.5   4      E

[Daryk]

Hmmm... why shave the extra half ton off?

[DevianID]

I still like the idea of the ER blazer to replace the dual ER larges in one location.  The Toyama is my big one, an ER blazer and a heat sink would make sense there.  A penetrator has the lasers on opposite arms, but a ER blazer penetrator with 1 extra heat sink would do well.

From like a geek side of things, as I think about it more, it's a really good bracket fire weapon.  Head capping and hole punching at range, but its clearly meant to cycle out when in short range.  Its less BV then 2 ER larges, cause less total damage, so it's less bad when paying for backup weapons cause the 24 heat ensures you get a heat refund.  Like i think it would improve the mauler to have 1 ER blazer instead of 2 ER larges.

I can also see it enabling an inner sphere 'pack hunter' kind of mech.  An assassin with light engine, ER blazer, and some heatsinks would be really annoying to fight.

[Daryk]

That Assassin sounds pretty good! :)

[Hellraiser]

Hmmm... why shave the extra half ton off?

Because I went off % & not just a Double minus 1.

I was looking at it from making the Blazer into Pulse v/s taking 2 pulses into Blazer.

[Daryk]

That makes sense, but I'd go with the latter approach myself.

[Vehrec]

Why bumble around with inferior lasers when you can use the Best Laser to make blazers?

Code: [Select]

Heat Damage Range Weight Space Tech Level
 48        30 0/8/15/25    15   12      F
OR....SUB-CAPITAL BLAZER

Code: [Select]

Heat Damage Range Weight Space Tech Level
 48        2(capital)/15(standard) 0/9/18/27   270   1(Capital)      E

[Daryk]

Heh... that compares favorably to the SCL-3... ;D

[Tyler Jorgensson]

That's... exactly what it is?  With stats mirroring the regular one with increased heat and range?

Sorry I forgot the stats of the original were a bit skewed than just two large lasers combined everything

[Daryk]

No worries... we all miss things now and then.  I'm finally working all the AToW modules into my spreadsheet and am still finding things we've all missed over all these years.  Errata reports to follow...

[Mechanis]

I should think a Chemical Blazer more likely
Exactly the same as a regular Blazer except it only generates 12 heat, needs ammunition (either 5/ton or 8/ton depending on which metric you decide to use) and doesn't need sinks on tanks.
Which gives it a nice little niche as a headcap gun you can easily cram in a tank that isn't a Gauss Rifle.

[Daryk]

Feel free to post proposed stats, good sir! :)

Either here or in a new thread... up to you...

[Hellraiser]

That makes sense, but I'd go with the latter approach myself.

That sounds fine till you decide to expand this to Blazer-Medium,  Blazer-Small,  Blazer-Medium-Pulse,  Blazer-Medium-ER....etc etc.

Removing 1 ton from 10 tons was a 10% reduction.  When I considered that you can "blazer" anything in this scenario, then % seemed far more logical.

[Daryk]

I tried the smaller ones out years ago.  The Smalls aren't even worth doing.  The Mediums have potential but need more tweaking, and yeah, they'd be at least 1.5 tons, if not 2 for no weight savings.  I did a "laser array" thread that discussed another approach.  It's linked in my sig block.

[DevianID]

I tried the smaller ones out years ago.  The Smalls aren't even worth doing.  The Mediums have potential but need more tweaking, and yeah, they'd be at least 1.5 tons, if not 2 for no weight savings.  I did a "laser array" thread that discussed another approach.  It's linked in my sig block.

Yeah, I think the point about % rears up a lot with smalls.  Like, a .9 ton small Blazer would be the same %, but we dont track by .9 tons, and youd have to round damage up to 5 even then.  And needing 5 small blazers for 4.5 tons and 10 crit slots, versus 10 small lasers, like you said doesnt feel worth it cause of just how efficient the medium laser is.
A .5 ton small blazer, on the other hand, is just a clear upgrade which doesnt feel right either.

[Hazard Pay]

I should think a Chemical Blazer more likely
Exactly the same as a regular Blazer except it only generates 12 heat, needs ammunition (either 5/ton or 8/ton depending on which metric you decide to use) and doesn't need sinks on tanks.
Which gives it a nice little niche as a headcap gun you can easily cram in a tank that isn't a Gauss Rifle.

Suralin made one years back

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=12121.msg365170#msg365170

[cray]

Dang it, I could have sworn this had come up before, but my searching of the forum yielded zilch.  So... here's what I think is a logical progression for my favorite weapon...

Code: [Select]

Heat Damage Range Weight Space Tech Level
 24        12 0/7/14/19    9   4      E

I like it. And it seems more practical than the RISC Hyper Laser.

[NUT-BUSTING TORQUE]

I could actually see this as being "Real" as:
1. A tech demonstrator! that weapon needs a MASSIVE amount of power to make that beam and fire it in a handful of seconds, so a company like a capacitor maker or some other energy storage company could make one as a public display.
2. A secondhand kit! The Toyama isn't the only 'mech with paired ER larges and battletech is full of single 'mech piloting gunslingers, so having a cottage industry around "Blazering" your weapons for additional penetrating damage makes a degree of sense, like hot match loads for firearms.

[Hazard Pay]

Quick optional rules for Blazers would be for them to fire both Cores one after the other instead of combined, but with the second having a +1 to hit since you're trying to keep the beam on target for longer.

[Daryk]

Instead of a second shot at +1, I'd probably go for a roll on the 2-column of the cluster table.  It would also reduce the thresholding to the damage of a single core.

[Mechanis]

Medium Blazers are definitely a possibility; My usual go to is 2 tons, 2 slots, 6 heat, 8 damage , 3/6/9 range. Gives them an "Inner Sphere Heavy Laser" feel.
(Small Blazers are pointless though, those just end up being a Medium Laser But Worse after rounding.)

Chemical Blazer would of course be still 9 tons/4 slots, 12 damage at 5/10/15 range, but would only generate 12 heat. Ammo is the real point of contention; you could either go with 5 (half that of the Large Chemical Laser) or 6 (80÷12) depending on how efficient you want to imply the design is.

Similarly, a Medium Chemical Blazer (or, as I prefer, a Light Blazer, since the small laser is pretty useless for that) would be a debate between 15 and 18 shots per ton.

Instead of a second shot at +1, I'd probably go for a roll on the 2-column of the cluster table.  It would also reduce the thresholding to the damage of a single core.

I am not in favor of using the 2 column overly often; in most cases my preference is to make two To-Hit rolls (with or without a modification or special rules about hitting single locations) as this involves the same number of rolls for most things. In point of fact, I prefer to use it only for missile weapons and RAC type repeaters that can get other columns if desired.

[DOC_Agren]

Daryk, I love you man..  but your addiction to the Blazer is scary to watch..

I am glad I never get to face you on tabletop directly

Much love 

[Hazard Pay]

The Large/"Heavy" Chem Blazer is scary, especially as you can put 4 of them nto the Chem Laser Ontos with 4 tons to spare for extra ammo.

[Daryk]

I'm not generally a fan of the 2-column either, but I think it would tend to discourage double shots, which is what I'd want.

[Mechanis]

I'm not generally a fan of the 2-column either, but I think it would tend to discourage double shots, which is what I'd want.

I think that the better option there is to make it eat a damage reduction.
So say, 6 or 7 damage per shot, rather than 8, as a "something something efficiency loss" penalty.
Or including a chance to break the thing UAC style as a "it's really not designed to do that" thing. Otherwise you end up with the same problem as Ultras: "why would I ever use this", only worse, because it doesn't even actually increase damage and so isn't useful for"well Guess I'll Die" situations where the consequence is irrelevant.