|
PoptartsNinja posted:Either way, only one of the Karnovs is carrying infantry so it's not a huge deal.  Oh, and so this isn't completely contentless, here's my favorite giant robot, the Canis. 
raverrn fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Feb 12, 2011 |
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 00:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:They must've changed something, then. I'm used to the old citytech rules where 'infantry weighed one ton', since otherwise APCs make no sense (you can only fit two in a hex, but it takes three to transport an infantry platoon >_> ). The other one is carrying puppies!!! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 00:45
|
|
|
Mukaikubo posted:The other one is carrying puppies!!! And the third one is carrying the Scooby Doo detective agency and three tons of Mama Cass' candy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 00:46
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:And the third one is carrying the Scooby Doo detective agency and three tons of Mama Cass' candy. ...candy. Those Liao bastards are going to bribe the children they're holding hostage and turn them into Junior Death Commandoes and have them suicide bomb our mechs!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 00:48
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:They must've changed something, then. No, you just remember wrong. One squad weighs a ton, which is a pretty reasonable approximation (100 kg per man, 10 men). 10-ton APCs were pretty useful in BattleTroops where it was beneficial not to dismount everyone in the same spot: in CityTech they're cannon fodder no matter how you slice it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 00:50
|
|
|
Hob_Gadling posted:No, you just remember wrong. Not surprising. I don't use infantry very often, and only really budgeted for about 1-2 squads per Karnov anyway. The Capellans don't have that much infantry to throw around, we're not fighting a Warrior House after all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 01:02
|
|
|
KnoxZone posted:That sounds like a freebirth excuse to me. What better way to fight than a fight with people to witness it? What greater way to test your mettle, if not in front of a spectating crowd? Is that's what you want, go to Solaris VII. Even Trueborn warriors say "gently caress the rules" when it really, really counts, and last I heard the Capellans weren't the kind to accept a Trial of Possession for the hostages. I mean, they'd accept it. But they'd kill the hostages anyway and use the trial as the perfect delaying tactic. I don't think even the Clans would be stupid enough to fall for that, though. Not anytime after first contact, anyway. Oh, and Poptarts? Jump infantry weighs more than more than regular infantry, and regular infantry weighs more than you thought. According to Total Warfare, foot platoons occupy three tons of cargo space, and Jump infantry occupies 4. That Karnov can be carrying two platoons of foot infantry, or one platoon of Jump infantry.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 04:02
|
|
|
ShadowDragon8685 posted:According to Total Warfare, foot platoons occupy three tons of cargo space, and Jump infantry occupies 4. That Karnov can be carrying two platoons of foot infantry, or one platoon of Jump infantry. Either way, it doesn't matter. It just means those poor Death Commandos are riding the outside of the Goblin like ablative armor. Likewise, Tech Platoon. VVV I dun hosed up, son. I acknowledge it, so I'm not going to retcon any tanks to make sense or everything would be a heavy APC that's suffering constant movement penalties for driving a wheeled vehicle on grass. PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 06:52 on Feb 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 06:40
|
|
|
Well, assuming an average soldier weight of 150 pounds carrying 30-50 pounds of equipment, 1 ton of soldier would be between 10-11 men. That's more of a squadron size, so 3 tons for a platoon sounds more realistic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 06:44
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Either way, it doesn't matter. It just means those poor Death Commandos are riding the outside of the Goblin like ablative armor. How many points of armor does a platoon count as? That is totally something I would expect Liaos to try (well, hostages strapped down onto APCs or something anyway)
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 08:15
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:The Capellans don't have that much infantry to throw around, we're not fighting a Warrior House after all. Come now, you know as well as everyone that every man, woman and child who can walk and carry a rusty spoon can serve as foot soldiers. Those without feet can also serve, but we're not likely to see them here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 08:24
|
|
|
UberJew posted:Infantry generally move 1, and have tiny, tiny ranges, but they can do some serious damage with ambushes in thick terrain like a city Ah, short range makes sense then. That infantry sounded too good to be true. I'm surprised how many people got kinda butthurt about my question. Mukaikubo posted:The other one is carrying puppies!!! poo poo, puppy hostages! There is no limit to the Capellans' Evil!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 08:58
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Either way, it doesn't matter. It just means those poor Death Commandos are riding the outside of the Goblin like ablative armor. So, are you going to co-opt the "battle armor hanging onto the outside of vehicles" rules to deal with attacks on the vehicles potentially killing some troopies, too? I can totally see a bunch of stick-in-rear end Death Commandos, decked out like the bastard outfit offspring of G22 from Alpha Protocol and that wanker from Splinter Cell, clinging to the outside of the Karnov, attached by a heavy-duty carabiner with a quick-release, precariously perched on the running boards and ready to drop off at a moment's notice. Poptarts, only your gently caress-ups can make things more awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 09:07
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Ah, short range makes sense then. That infantry sounded too good to be true. I'm surprised how many people got kinda butthurt about my question. YOU FOOL! Those are Death Commando puppies! They've been bred and raised to infiltrate and murder from Day One! They'd all gladly bite your testicles off for fun!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 11:16
|
|
|
Man the Death Commandos legend has spread to be even more awesome than anything they can do in game now 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 12:12
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:VVV I dun hosed up, son. I acknowledge it, so I'm not going to retcon any tanks to make sense or everything would be a heavy APC that's suffering constant movement penalties for driving a wheeled vehicle on grass. Arglebargle III posted:Ah, short range makes sense then. That infantry sounded too good to be true. I'm surprised how many people got kinda butthurt about my question.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 13:14
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I'm surprised how many people got kinda butthurt about my question. People get butthurt about your questions because you ask them in an irritatingly confrontational way. Instead of just asking a question, you preface it by saying how stupidly unrealistic it is and how much the setting sucks. It'd be like seeing someone driving a specific car, and instead of asking for their reasoning in buying said car, you just mention that you see a lot of homosexuals purchasing them and ask if the guy you're talking to bought the car to attract other men. Both questions seek the same information, but one way of asking is going to get you punched in the face.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 13:30
|
|
|
In my megamek game yesterday, I actually found most infantry to be more a sandpaper effect, and easily decimated. Muka can confirm that even swarmed he was able to pretty much ignore them as much as possible.  that map is a deathtrap though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 13:54
|
|
|
Axe-man posted:In my megamek game yesterday, I actually found most infantry to be more a sandpaper effect, and easily decimated. Muka can confirm that even swarmed he was able to pretty much ignore them as much as possible. Well, yeah. Poor bloody infantry is basically only a real danger in BT games when you play with hidden unit rules and in a lot of terrain they can use to hide themselves. Without the hidden unit rules, they're mostly nice as a cheap area denial force unless your opponent brings tons of flamers and machineguns. 1-2 companies of PBI in a forest with hidden unit rules? The best bet of most Mechs is to burn down the entire forest, because trying to pinpoint the fuckers allows them to lay down some nasty fire concentrations or even start point-blank leg/swarm attacks (basically the guys running up to the Mech and starting to go at it with magnetic satchel charges; every successful leg attack automatically causes a roll for through-armor-criticals on the leg, so it can really gently caress over even assault Mechs.) Urban terrain is even worse due to the cover it gives them and because scorched earth becomes a lot more resource-intensive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 15:58
|
|
|
Axe-man posted:In my megamek game yesterday, I actually found most infantry to be more a sandpaper effect, and easily decimated. Muka can confirm that even swarmed he was able to pretty much ignore them as much as possible. You never actually launched a swarm mek attack on me, I skidded into a 1,000 CF wall and sploded before you could.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 16:12
|
|
|
Mukaikubo posted:You never actually launched a swarm mek attack on me, I skidded into a 1,000 CF wall and sploded before you could. I'll have you know i swarmed you the turn before not my fault your bad piloting got you killed 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 16:26
|
|
|
Magni posted:Well, yeah. Poor bloody infantry is basically only a real danger in BT games when you play with hidden unit rules and in a lot of terrain they can use to hide themselves. Without the hidden unit rules, they're mostly nice as a cheap area denial force unless your opponent brings tons of flamers and machineguns.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 16:43
|
|
|
It's bunny of doom's first game ever, incidentally, so let's give him some tactical advice. You could advance laterally or attempt to flank the Capellans (you've got the movement for it), but that could leave you badly exposed. You also have the range to find some cover, bunker down, and turret for a bit (like the blackjack is attempting to do but can't do effectively anymore since half of its autocannons have just been blown up). You could also make an end run to the hostages, but that'd put you in a position to eat a LOT of SRMs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 18:55
|
|
|
The Lancelot is a solid dependable mech, really you don't have to worry about ammo and heat isn't your biggest concern, in many ways your are a backbone of the lance. I suggest flanking them, and unloading them as many turns you have a shot that won't take you too hot. Consider running your mech about 3-4 heat at all times. Just shooting even somewhat long shots, who knows that 10 roll for them could crit and kill them. You have no ammo to worry about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 19:20
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:It's because those infantry can deal out all kinds of rape to a mech using rifles but an Abrahms can't scratch the paint. IE: touchiest subject in all of Battletech, doubly touchy in the USA. When did an Abra(h?)ms tank come up? Zaodai posted:saying how stupidly unrealistic it is and how much the setting sucks. Hey I like the setting, but this thread has been kind of a journey of discovery for me in how silly it is. My last post was supposed to be an "oh well, battletech makes no sense so okay" but I could see how it came off differently. So I'm intrigued by the conversation about how energy weapons are always better than ballistic weapons. Mech building is probably my favorite part of the game. Can you really always get more firepower for an equal weight of energy weapons+heat sinks than ballistic weapons + ammo?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:So I'm intrigued by the conversation about how energy weapons are always better than ballistic weapons. Mech building is probably my favorite part of the game. Can you really always get more firepower for an equal weight of energy weapons+heat sinks than ballistic weapons + ammo? Well, let's just look at one reasonably illustrative comparison: The Autocannon/10 vs. the PPC, keeping it Tech 1. The PPC: 10 damage, 10 heat, 7 tons. AC/10: 10 damage, 3 heat, 12 tons. 1 ton per 10 shots. If you want to carry enough heat sinks to COMPLETELY wipe out the weapon's heat: PPC: 10 damage for 17 tons AC/10: 10 damage for 15 tons (+Ammo) So, if you really, really only want to have 10 shots before you lose the use of your weapon, the PPC is better. The AC/10 has a SLIGHTLY higher range, though. But that's usually not enough. And this is if you absolutely have to completely cancel out your heat, which you almost always don't do since riding the heat curve by keeping yourself at low but nonzero heat is a very useful tactic- and that makes the PPC look even better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 19:38
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:It's bunny of doom's first game ever, incidentally, so let's give him some tactical advice. I would flank if the right-side Mechs are committed to ganging the Cataphract. Move through the 0116/0117 pass and head for the woods cover ~0711-0810. If the battle develops as seems likely, you'll be behind them, or they'll have to leave something to deal with you, which you can outmaneuver if you need to. PoptartsNinja posted:You also have the range to find some cover, bunker down, and turret for a bit (like the blackjack is attempting to do but can't do effectively anymore since half of its autocannons have just been blown up). Taking up positions in the woods would be the thing to do if not for the compelling time limit. Each turn's delay costs totally artificial lives! PoptartsNinja posted:You could also make an end run to the hostages, but that'd put you in a position to eat a LOT of SRMs. The SRM Carrier is a problem, and prevents heedless charges into the compound proper. One of the reasons I thought Bobbin/Bobby should jump through the right-side woods is because the Wolverine is uniquely suited to killing the poo poo out of the SRM Carrier. The vehicle has no turret, and PTN loses initiative, so the Wolv would be able to jump alongside/behind it fairly easily. The Wolverine has the best anti-vehicle weapon as well, since what you want most against vehicles (besides Infernos) is multiple location rolls. \/ Fair enough, but these are the Caballeros! Cold logic is anathema to them! Arriba, etc. The Merry Marauder fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Feb 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 19:38
|
|
|
The Merry Marauder posted:Taking up positions in the woods would be the thing to do if not for the compelling time limit. Each turn's delay costs totally artificial lives! I agree with everything else, but they've got a lot of hostages' lives to go through before they're out. Gamey, sure, but... They can afford from a cold hard rules POV a few rounds delay. Now, the 'better' way to be playing, they should definitely push to save as many as possible- I just wanted to be clear about that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 19:40
|
|
|
Well I think part of the appeal of Energy weapons versus ballistics and missiles is that heat is literally the only tradeoff, and that is something you can work around either through limiting the amount you fire (which works like ammo) or by limiting how often you fire. I don't know if you can literally always get more pure DPS out of energy weapons vs ballistics and missiles, but you should, realistically, always be able to get more volley damage out of energy weapons because you can pack more of them on at the expense of heat sinks to some extent, and you get some free heat sinks with the engine to offset the initial disadvantage of the first few anyway. And you don't have to worry about ammo explosions on top of it. Sometimes, the higher volley damage would offset even a lower overall DPS if it lets you take out the target one "round" sooner.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 19:40
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:When did an Abra(h?)ms tank come up? No, you can't, unless you're using clan weapons. Really, the Clans have no reason to ever field a Gauss Rifle (13 tons for 15 damage and 1 heat with 8 shots) when they can field an ER PPC and 7 heat sinks (13 tons for 15 damage and 1 heat with unlimited shots).
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 19:41
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:So I'm intrigued by the conversation about how energy weapons are always better than ballistic weapons. Mech building is probably my favorite part of the game. Can you really always get more firepower for an equal weight of energy weapons+heat sinks than ballistic weapons + ammo? Thats rather an involved argument that there are quite a few sides too. Energy Weapons: They can unless they are hit or having too few heat sinks, you can fire these from the first turn of the game to the last turn of the game without guilt or worry. This means you can take long shots constantly. Energy weapons are not as bulky and weigh less than most ballistic weapons. There is no ammo to explode and I believe PPCs don't explode unless they have a cap on them, so no internal damage due to the weapon not firing right. Since this is tech level 1, they have the disadvantage of being put on mechs that have too few heat sinks and they have less range than comparable ballistic weapons. Most mechs have at least 1 energy weapon, but may not have the heat sinks to actually FIRE it consistently. Ballistic Weapons: They weigh a lot and are very bulky but most ballistic weapons have better range than Lasers, limited by weight and ammo. They usually use very little heat meaning that if you are cooking cause your energy weapons heated you up you can still spare the 1 or 2 heat to fire them. The biggest draw backs is since this is tech one that you don't have the heavy hitters as Gauss in any real amount during this era. Also ammo, ammo makes things fun, an TAC can end a game in 3 minutes without stackpole if you just happen to fall the wrong way or someone else is hit by your flaming corpse. Tech one is ripe with ACs cause they are cheap. They can be worthwhile and in fact can really do awesome things, but at the danger of explosion and heavy bulky components.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 19:49
|
|
|
As you can probably imagine, bunnyofdoom, I'm moving my Hunchback to support Bobbin in killing the Cataphract. I'm doing this by running as far as I can and then firing as many weapons as I can possibly hit him with, because that seems to be the the thing to do in a Hunchback. Hopefully he and I (and Red Mage if he comes along) can do enough damage to the Cataphract that Bobby can get freed up to go after the SRM Carrier, which is something I DO NOT want to tangle with. At all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 20:01
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Can you really always get more firepower for an equal weight of energy weapons+heat sinks than ballistic weapons + ammo? No, but for the most part the cases where ballistics are better are really marginal. As far as I can see, there are three things that make energy weapons + heat sinks a superior combination than ammo weapons in gameplay: 1) gameplay revolves around heat. If an Archer takes early TAC and suffers 2 engine hits (+5 heat per round per hit), it's crippled as it can no longer dissipate heat. Warhammer can still fire one PPC and continue to operate. 2) no ammo to explore or run out. This is especially a problem with the large weapons (6 shots per ton of LRM 20 ammo, 5 shots per ton of AC/20 ammo). Since ammo explosion always causes 2 hits to pilot, even one shot exploding creates a 1/9 chance (5+ to stay conscious) of pilot passing out per turn. Unconscious pilot will get knocked down, causing one additional hit (7+ to stay awake) and by then it's more or less a lost unit. 3) every mech comes with 10 heat sinks mounted initially. This is the big deal that makes energy weapons a little too good. With high heat weapons you want to go with range brackets, and 10 free sinks give you a free PPC or 3 free medium lasers. That's 10 tons worth of equipment. For light mechs it's almost impossible to surpass the sheer damage output (2x SRM6 will average 16 damage but is short range only). The balance becomes even more skewed towards energy weapons once double heat sinks start becoming common. With heavies you want to add some SRMs or LRMs into the mix once you have the tonnage for it. AC/20 is a special case: 20 damage in a single location hurts every mech and stands a good chance of punching through the armor of almost everything under 80 tons on the first hit. But 4 medium lasers can cause the same amount of damage, just spread out. With 3025 equipment (ie. the stuff we've mostly seen) ballistics aren't grossly out of whack. They're slightly behind the curve, but mechs like Centurion or Crusader are not an automatic death sentence. Once double heat sinks are common stuff, their main advantage (low heat output per point of damage) becomes obsolete. Missiles at least get some neat tricks to compensate and create new niches.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 20:11
|
|
|
Hob_Gadling posted:AC/20 is a special case: 20 damage in a single location hurts every mech and stands a good chance of punching through the armor of almost everything under 80 tons on the first hit. The AC/20 is the best weapon and all other ballistics suffer the disadvantage of not being AC/20s
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 20:19
|
|
|
Hob_Gadling posted:With 3025 equipment (ie. the stuff we've mostly seen) ballistics aren't grossly out of whack. They're slightly behind the curve, but mechs like Centurion or Crusader are not an automatic death sentence. Once double heat sinks are common stuff, their main advantage (low heat output per point of damage) becomes obsolete. Missiles at least get some neat tricks to compensate and create new niches. You are right LRMS/SRMs always hold their unique niche in battle tech, while ACs and even LBXs go mostly obsolete. Later tech levels try to introduce special ammo types and rapid fire to make them have a niche, but in the end, with clan tech, energy weapons are the best to have, and have no draw backs worth noting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 20:23
|
|
|
The Merry Marauder posted:The SRM Carrier is a problem, and prevents heedless charges into the compound proper. One of the reasons I thought Bobbin/Bobby should jump through the right-side woods is because the Wolverine is uniquely suited to killing the poo poo out of the SRM Carrier. The vehicle has no turret, and PTN loses initiative, so the Wolv would be able to jump alongside/behind it fairly easily. The Wolverine has the best anti-vehicle weapon as well, since what you want most against vehicles (besides Infernos) is multiple location rolls. Infernos in TW aren't the insta-murder they used to be against vehicles. Nowadays, every hit by an inferno SRM simply causes a critical hit roll and nothing else. All combat vehicles also get a -2 modifier on that crit roll. IE, anything under 8+ means that the inferno attack does nothing and none of the insta-kill crits are possible at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 20:23
|
|
|
Axe-man posted:You are right LRMS/SRMs always hold their unique niche in battle tech, while ACs and even LBXs go mostly obsolete. Later tech levels try to introduce special ammo types and rapid fire to make them have a niche, but in the end, with clan tech, energy weapons are the best to have, and have no draw backs worth noting. Counterpoint: Hunchback II-C. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 20:25
|
|
|
Second counterpoint: Clantech is for pussies. Real men use IS equipment.  The only Clantech you should ever use is the one you ripped out of their dead Mechs. With IS tech, ballistic weapons very much have their niche in the higher-tech games, be it the flexible hole-making/critseeking of LB/Xs, the sheer damage spikes of Ultras and RACs or the range/damage combo of the Gauss Rifle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 20:36
|
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I'm all about IS tech only in fact i don't think i've even played with clan scrap in megamek yet. But if you were going to basically min/max a mech, energy weapons are the way to go, pure energy weapons are simply to effective for longer than the alternatives, You'll notice i Didn't talk about Gauss at all The sad thing is that everything ballistics do, there is an energy weapon that does near the same thing. With the Racs and Ultras and stuff it makes it different, but with Gauss, it can be awesome, but compared to the weapon in heat sinks and ERPPCS it isn't as effective. Mukaikubo posted:Counterpoint: Hunchback II-C. I love the Hunchback, but If they could get two heavy Gauss in that sucker it would be so much better  AC20s are just too short ranged for the thin armor!
Axe-man fucked around with this message at 20:41 on Feb 12, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
Axe-man posted:You are right LRMS/SRMs always hold their unique niche in battle tech, while ACs and even LBXs go mostly obsolete. Later tech levels try to introduce special ammo types and rapid fire to make them have a niche, but in the end, with clan tech, energy weapons are the best to have, and have no draw backs worth noting. Normal AC's I'd agree, but LB-10x and -20x have a niche all their own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2011 20:44
|
|
