3 replies to this topic

[Lord Foul]

Energy weapons follow the general range format of Max=2xBase
Ballistic weapons follow the general range format of Max=3xBase

There are a small number of weapons that deviate from the format for no obvious reason and I wonder if these were oversights or deliberate decisions.

Flamer 90/90: This one had to be deliberate and I can't see how adjusting the range would benefit the current state of this weapon.

AC/5 620/1700: Just odd on several levels - not only does it fail to follow the standard form, but it doesn't even match the range of the UAC/5, which was specifically patched to bring its basic characteristics in line with the parent weapon. Seems like oversight, should probably be 600/1800 for both weapons.

Machine Gun 120/240: I coming up blank on this one. They basically only get used at ranges suitable for fisticuffs, so I doubt it matters.

Thoughts? Dev commentary?

Edited by Lord Foul, 18 November 2013 - 02:17 PM.

[Jack Avery]

The oddities you noticed are all intentional. The MG range used to be 90/180, but it was increased to help its viability.

The AC/5 is similar; according to tabletop, it actually has a shorter range than the UAC/5, but it was increased to help give it a reason to exist. This was back when the UAC/5 had a faster single fire rate than the AC/5.

[Stomp]

I'd like to mention the Small Laser, too. Currently it's range is the same as the Flamer, and even LESS than the Machine Gun. I specifically take armor off my Hunchback to fit a Medium Laser... I mean the range is pathetic. Why have it?

[Durant Carlyle]

Small Laser range is accurate to tabletop (except for the beyond-base-range part). Machine gun range was buffed for no good reason -- it should be 90 meters. They are meant to be short range weapons -- remember, most combat is supposed to happen within 300 meters in BattleTech. Base large laser range is actually long range in-universe.