Register Register

Author Topic: Rakshasa Glitch  (Read 760 times)

bronzite

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • Ten Years on Terra
Rakshasa Glitch
« on: 01 August 2022, 20:53:29 »
I've been prepping to do some Strategic BattleForce, and I was walking through the examples in the book.  Specifically, the ones on IO:BF p269/IO p339, depending on your edition.  In the example, the very first 'Mech listed is the Rakshasa MDG-1A.  The stats given match the MUL.  Given the conversion rules in the old StratOps book, though, I cannot get my values to match up.  When I convert the MDG-1A to Alpha Strike, the process spits out a 3/3/2 base attack with an LRM 1/1/1 and IF2 arc, while the MUL and example versions have 4/4/4 base attack and just the IF2.

I know the Total Warfare-to-Alpha Strike rules didn't get republished in the latest edition of IO, so I'm wondering if the MUL has just been tweaked and I should really be working on just scraping the MUL on a regular basis, or if I'm making some error in my calculation.

A quick summary of the numbers I'm getting are:

Code: [Select]
    Converting Rakshasa MDG-1A
Size 3
Has Movement mode bm 5
Armor 7
Structure 3
Weapon ER Large Laser contributed  8/8/8/0
Weapon Medium Laser contributed  5/5/0/0
Weapon ER Large Laser contributed  8/8/8/0
Weapon Medium Laser contributed  5/5/0/0
Weapon LRM 10 contributed LRM 4/8/8/0
Weapon Medium Pulse Laser contributed  6.6/6.6/0/0
Weapon LRM 10 contributed LRM 4/8/8/0
Maximum Heat Generation 44, Dissipation 30
Base Attack values  24.45/24.45/12/0
LRM values LRM 6/12/12/0
Total Base Attack Values  24.45/24.45/12/0
Final attack values  3/3/2/0
Special Ability LRM1/1/1
Special Ability IF2

If anybody can either tell me where I'm making an error, or if the conversion rules just weren't used to make the MUL unit list, I'd appreciate it.

Kerfuffin(925)

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2595
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #1 on: 02 August 2022, 00:39:50 »
https://www.mordel.net/tro.php?a=vt&ut=bm&id=670&fltr=qf.000.Designer~Contains~Catalyst%20Game%20Labs~qf.000.Name%2FModel~Contains~Raksh

Move to the alpha strike tab at the top, it shows calculations.

Total Warfare stats to Alpha Strike stats come from the Alpha Strike Companion book, not StratOps. It seems like you are making mistakes in the allowance or heat. In AS you aren’t punished for overheating by 4. At 5 or more you are punished. (It’s when you start taking heat penalties). Also your Base Attack Values are way off.

Double check your math with what that link does. They are as up to date as anything else is.
NCKestrel’s new favorite.

Hellraiser

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11518
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #2 on: 02 August 2022, 01:22:39 »
I might be remembering it wrong, but, isn't there also something in there about Artemis LRMs not getting the LRM special option?
Because your using ARTEMIS & not the special ammos?
For some reason I swear I'm remembering that, might also be an issue with IF values too, IDR.
3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers
3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves

"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47
Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo

Kerfuffin(925)

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2595
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #3 on: 02 August 2022, 01:43:25 »
I might be remembering it wrong, but, isn't there also something in there about Artemis LRMs not getting the LRM special option?
Because your using ARTEMIS & not the special ammos?
For some reason I swear I'm remembering that, might also be an issue with IF values too, IDR.

Yeah. Something like that as well.

A while ago, before I became a player rather than a fan, they said they’d get a conversion document linked in the downloads section because the companion is now OOP. But it hasn’t happened yet.
NCKestrel’s new favorite.

worktroll

  • Ombudsman
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 24661
  • 504th "Gateway" Division
    • There are Monsters in my Sky!
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #4 on: 02 August 2022, 02:03:42 »
Exactly that. The Artemis IV on the two LRM-10 launchers ups the damage just enough to round up to 4, and invalidates the LRM values it would otherwise get. LRM just means you can use alternate ammos, which you can't with the Art-IV.
* No, FASA wasn't big on errata - ColBosch
* The Housebook series is from the 80's and is the foundation of Btech, the 80's heart wrapped in heavy metal that beats to this day - Sigma
* To sum it up: FASAnomics: By Cthulhu, for Cthulhu - Moonsword
* Because Battletech is a conspiracy by Habsburg & Bourbon pretenders - MadCapellan
* The Hellbringer is cool, either way. It's not cool because it's bad, it's cool because it's bad with balls - Nightsky
* It was a glorious time for people who felt that we didn't have enough Marauder variants - HABeas2, re "Empires Aflame"

bronzite

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • Ten Years on Terra
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #5 on: 02 August 2022, 07:36:28 »
https://www.mordel.net/tro.php?a=vt&ut=bm&id=670&fltr=qf.000.Designer~Contains~Catalyst%20Game%20Labs~qf.000.Name%2FModel~Contains~Raksh

Move to the alpha strike tab at the top, it shows calculations.

Total Warfare stats to Alpha Strike stats come from the Alpha Strike Companion book, not StratOps. It seems like you are making mistakes in the allowance or heat. In AS you aren’t punished for overheating by 4. At 5 or more you are punished. (It’s when you start taking heat penalties). Also your Base Attack Values are way off.

Double check your math with what that link does. They are as up to date as anything else is.

Thanks for the link!  I think the differences in my values are because I'm totaling base damage, and then converting to BF scale, while as the Mordel.net seems to be converting the weapons and then totaling.  They're actually getting to the same values I am.

Of course, according to the Mordel.net numbers, the LRM damage would round to at least 1 at every range bracket, so the answer must lie in...

Exactly that. The Artemis IV on the two LRM-10 launchers ups the damage just enough to round up to 4, and invalidates the LRM values it would otherwise get. LRM just means you can use alternate ammos, which you can't with the Art-IV.

 Artemis LRM's not getting the LRM special ability.  I just can't find a citation for that anywhere, but as mentioned, I'm working off the 2011 SO rules, not the 2014 AS Companion rules.  The Catalyst Store isn't selling the PDF for the AS Companion anymore, so looks like DriveThruRPG is getting 15 of my hard-earned C-Bills so I have the latest rules to work off of.

Thank you all very much, it never would have occurred to me that Artemis might take away the LRM special ability, and it is possible that will erase the entire drift that I'm seeing.  I'll try to remember to post back here either way.

bronzite

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • Ten Years on Terra
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #6 on: 02 August 2022, 08:26:05 »
Quick update having pulled the Companion and dug into the numbers from Mordel.

The trigger for an LRM special ability is:

Quote from: Alpha Strike Companion(p126)
A unit receives this special if it carries any number
of standard or enhanced LRM and/or MML launchers that, when
combined, are capable of delivering 1 or more points of damage
at Medium range after heat-modification and before final damage
value rounding. To find the final attack values for this ability, add
up the damage for all of the unit’s standard or enhanced LRM
launchers (indicated on the weapon conversion tables by any
weapons with the “LRM” note), and round all sums normally. If the
weapon lists multiple damage values at a given range bracket,
use the first (left-most) damage values.

The medium-range calculation for Mordel.net suggests that the damage from the paired LRMs at Medium Range is 1.6:

Quote from: "https://www.mordel.net/tro.php?a=cbm"

     LRM 10 w/ Artemis IV FCS                                                                               (+)    0.800  =    2.460
     LRM 10 w/ Artemis IV FCS                                                                               (+)    0.800  =    3.260


The heat dissipation adjustment is Adjusted Damage  = [Base Damage * 30]/40:

Quote from: https://www.mordel.net/tro.php?a=cbm
  Heat-modified damage value:                                                                                                       
     Damage subtotal multiplied by the total heat dissipation                                               (*)       30  =  145.800
     Divided by the maximum heat output - 4                                                                 (/)       40  =    3.645


If we apply that independently to the 1.6 damage from the LRM bank, that gives us 1.2 damage in the Medium Range bracket, which really seems like it should trigger the inclusion of an LRM ability.

I did a full-text search of the document to see if there was any mention of Artemis excluding this ability, but I didn't find any reference to it, and the conversion rule explicitly references "standard or enhanced" LRM, which I interpret to mean augmented by FCS.  I suspect the idea that the LRM ability isn't applicable to Artemis-equipped LRMs comes from the Alpha Strike Companion Errata, which does say Artemis-equipped LRMs won't contribute to the IF ability.

Again, thank you all for pointing me in this direction, but I'm afraid there's still some nuance of the rules I must be missing here.

Alexander Knight

  • Peditum Generalis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4911
  • O-R-E-O
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #7 on: 02 August 2022, 15:43:57 »
If you have Artemis systems you are assumed to always be using Artemis ammo.  Just like LBX cannons are assumed to always be firing cannister.

bronzite

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • Ten Years on Terra
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #8 on: 02 August 2022, 17:33:22 »
If you have Artemis systems you are assumed to always be using Artemis ammo.  Just like LBX cannons are assumed to always be firing cannister.

Sure, I can buy that.  The damage calculations don't make sense without having Artemis-enabled munitions.

So I guess the argument here is that implicitly there's no reason to break out the Artemis-enabled LRMs because if you were to load non-Artemis rounds, the damage numbers would be off because the unit calculations are presuming an Artemis load, and there's no way to recalculate that without recomputing the whole unit?

bronzite

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • Ten Years on Terra
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #9 on: 02 August 2022, 19:30:24 »
OK, to close this out, it does appear that Artemis-equipped LRMs simply are merged into the base attack, regardless of how much damage they do.  When I made that change, my numbers all agreed with the MUL.

Curiously, the MUL also gives the Rakshsa IF2, which according to the Alpha Strike Companion errata it should not have, but I suspect the MUL has not been updated with the latest errata.  Mordel.net says it should have IF1, and I think it shouldn't have IF at all.  We may just have to agree to disagree for the moment.

GreekFire

  • Aeternus Ignis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3767
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #10 on: 02 August 2022, 19:45:31 »
Hey bronzite! I just stumbled across this thread.

Just to let you know, the MUL does have an errata thread here: https://bg.battletech.com/forums/errata/master-unit-list-mul-feedback-thread-iii-read-the-first-post/

If your calculations ever don't line up with the MUL and you feel certain of your work, feel free to toss a comment in that thread. It brings the issue to the awareness of the AS MUL team members, and sometimes allows us to correct bugs or incorrect cards.
Tu habites au Québec? Tu veux jouer au BattleTech? Envoie-moi un message!

theagent

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 279
Re: Rakshasa Glitch
« Reply #11 on: 26 October 2022, 18:48:08 »
Ok, I think there might just be an issue in the calculation somewhere.

Looks like you're using CBT-style values (which are just ASx10), but that's fine.  Your base values, though, should be before heat.  So you should be getting 40.6/4.06 for Short, 48.6/4.86 for Medium, & 32/3.2 for Long.  It looks like the discrepancy is you didn't include the LRM damage values in your base damage.  Also, base damage doesn't include heat modifications, that's the next step.

For the heat modification, the assumption with AS is that your movement heat is already accounted for, & you're only adjusting for weapon heat.  Hence, the calculation per bracket is (Base Damage) x (Heat Dissipation) / (Max Heat - 4), assuming your max heat exceeds the dissipation for that bracket by at least 4 points.  For Short & Medium, max weapon heat is 42 (exceeds by 12), so the calculation is (Bracket) x 30 / 38; for Long, max weapon heat is 32, so since it doesn't exceed it by 4 you don't worry about calculating overheat but you still double-check the heat-adjusted damage.  More importantly, since 32 - 4 = 28, which is less than your 30 dissipation, Long range isn't heat-adjusted.  So, there's no OVL ability, & your Long damage is 3.2, rounded up to 4 (which matches MUL).  For Short, it's (4.06 x 30 / 38) = 3.205, rounded up to 4, which also matches MUL.  For Medium, it's (4.86 x 30 / 38) = 3.837, rounded up to 4, again matching MUL.  The original unadjusted-for-heat numbers were 4/5/4; since there's a difference in the Medium bracket, you have OV (Overheat) 1, which matches MUL. Your heat calculations were assuming 44 max heat (including the movement heat), which threw off your adjusted damage calculations.

As pointed out before, Artemis precludes the use of alternate ammo, so the LRM#/#/# ability isn't available.  IF#, however, is available, & you were very close on its calculation; the base number is 1.2, but for IF# it's rounded "normally" (i.e. round down if it's under .5), hence the IF1 from MUL.

Still...you were very close in your calculations.  Had you remembered to include the LRM damage for Short/Medium, & the ER Large Lasers for Long, your rounded attack values would have matched MUL (30.45/36.45/32, modified to 3.045/3.645/3.2, rounded to 4/4/4), & you only would have been off on the IF#.

 

Register