20517 replies to this topic

[Metus regem]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2016 - 03:45 PM, said:

Well, she ain't meant to alpha. Long Range: 12 heat if running 11 Heat sinks. Short Range: 14 heat if running, 11 heatsinks.
Not really meant to overlap.

Like I said, with proper discipline.... I just know too many tools that would alpha strike with it....

[Bishop Steiner]

Metus regem, on 08 September 2016 - 03:50 PM, said:

Like I said, with proper discipline.... I just know too many tools that would alpha strike with it....

well, stupid people don't survive long in the succession wars.....

[DerMaulwurf]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2016 - 12:07 PM, said:

Small lasers are all but useless in TT. At 3 hex range you have a +4 to hit penalty. And it's not like you are going to stack them with the PPC. This is 3025. PPC for range, 4 medium lasers up close, and it has 11 heat sinks.

Realistically, if I went with your approach, the "better" approach would be to use 2x Medium Laser over 4x Small laser. The heat difference is minimal, as is the Damage. But having 3x the range? And more importantly, what is long range for smalls is short range for mediums. So for a bit you overlap the MLasers and PPC, and then when you get below PPC ranage, you bleed off the excess heat anyhow. But you are going to get higher avg dmg with the MLs over the SLs because of having more time in range, and lower to hit penalties, in most scenarios.

Yes I could have made a meta mech, but that is boring.

Aye, one of the most fundamental part of BT is "range=accuracy". And the lack of it in MWO is distorting quite a few things. For example large lasers don't have much effect in the long range bracket in BT, while they are habitually used at extreme range in MWO.

It's one of the reasons in TT why I dislike MPLs (only superior to MLs in very limited scenarios) and like ER-PPC (Actually a chance to try to maneuver for that accuracy advantage)

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2016 - 12:45 PM, said:

[...]
If I'm playing your typical lack of imagination MWO type campaign, then the MG becomes superfluous. If I play a REAL campaign, with Infantry, ambushes, etc? The MG makes perfect sense.

Which is the beauty of 3025. No free lunch. Uncork SLDF tech and I can make mechs that will beat and 3 stock 3025 mechs of equal or lesser tonnage.

[...]

Eh, flamers beat MGs any day of the week.

And stock-only 3025 BT still has its "meta-mechs". For the light-bracket my primary stock choice would be the 10F "Fire Javelin". It can close safely with big movement modifiers, packs reasonable close-range punch with ML armament and has good armor.

The fun comes from doing proper campagins, where you can restrict what is available. If all you have is a bunch of Commandos, you're going to have to make that work.

You can do that at any tech level. Vice versa picking optimal builds only (especially custom build) gets stale really fast at any tech level, too. I personally prefer the the higher tech levels for the faster game play that higher firepower and less survivability brings.

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

well, stupid people don't survive long in the succession wars.....

The successor states were pretty stupid for starting the whole thing, though (Let's bomb each other a few centuries back! Yay.). And they made it for the whole run.

[Bishop Steiner]

DerMaulwurf, on 08 September 2016 - 06:07 PM, said:

Aye, one of the most fundamental part of BT is "range=accuracy". And the lack of it in MWO is distorting quite a few things. For example large lasers don't have much effect in the long range bracket in BT, while they are habitually used at extreme range in MWO.

It's one of the reasons in TT why I dislike MPLs (only superior to MLs in very limited scenarios) and like ER-PPC (Actually a chance to try to maneuver for that accuracy advantage)



Eh, flamers beat MGs any day of the week.

And stock-only 3025 BT still has its "meta-mechs". For the light-bracket my primary stock choice would be the 10F "Fire Javelin". It can close safely with big movement modifiers, packs reasonable close-range punch with ML armament and has good armor.

The fun comes from doing proper campagins, where you can restrict what is available. If all you have is a bunch of Commandos, you're going to have to make that work.

You can do that at any tech level. Vice versa picking optimal builds only (especially custom build) gets stale really fast at any tech level, too. I personally prefer the the higher tech levels for the faster game play that higher firepower and less survivability brings.



The successor states were pretty stupid for starting the whole thing, though (Let's bomb each other a few centuries back! Yay.). And they made it for the whole run.

Flamers are very bad things to use indiscriminately in built up rural areas. You check the accidental fire tables, lately?

They have their place, but they aren't an all purpose replacement for MGs. Likewise why I didn't just mount a small laser (plus infantry rules for MGs are better than SLs) Particularly from a garrison or defensive standpoint, I don't want to burn my city down. Also, MGs allow for riot ammo in garrison situations.

As for the Successor States, the rich and powerful have long gotten away with being stupid (though the ancestors that made them rich and powerful, seldom were). It's the common man who suffers for their stupidity. A nice summation of that can be found in "War Pigs" by Black Sabbath.

[ShadowbaneX]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 September 2016 - 03:45 PM, said:

Well, she ain't meant to alpha. Long Range: 12 heat if running 11 Heat sinks. Short Range: 14 heat if running, 11 heatsinks.
Not really meant to overlap.

Not sure if I mentioned this up thread somewhere, but in the 3025 MechWarrior campaign I'm in one player is running something similar with an Enforcer. Like your mech it uses a PPC for range with a similar amount of heatsinks, so it can walk and fire without worry, perhaps even run. For in close though it upgrades the SL to an ML and then mounts a pair of SRM6s. Armour is nearly max at 10 tons, it's got a decent amount of ammo and can jump.

I imagine a lance of these guys would be quite a menace on the battlefield.

Was just doing the math and this would almost make more sense as a Vindicator variant, especially if you're worried about repair/modification costs. It already has the PPC and the head mounted ML. Just drop the LRM5, the SL, a bit of armour and 4 heat sinks for the SRM6s. Swap the LRM ammo for SRM ammo and add an extra ton to bring it up to two total.

Edited by ShadowbaneX, 10 September 2016 - 03:39 PM.

[Ovion]

So I (re)made a thing:

All mechs (plus unreleased, but announced) mechs, with all variants:


The same, but without variants:


And small, to make it easier to see more at once:


Enjoy.

[Strum Wealh]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 September 2016 - 07:07 PM, said:

my latest 3025 mech for my campaign (eventually I'll get to play it!)

Basically, it's a "what if" the Wolfhound Project had been run like contracts are handled today, with multiple manufacturers in the running, trying to meet the objective in different ways, hoping to win the contract.

In this case, it's an entry from General Motors. They basically downsized their GM Marauder chassis, to build a 35 ton mech, hoping to capitalize on the popularity of the Marauder mech. By adding 4 JJs to the torsos, GM matched the movement profile of the DCMS Panther, along with it's overall armor levels. Likewise they retained one of the Magna Hellstar PPCs, moved to the right torso dorsal mount, allowing it to match the Panther's long range punch.

For in-fighting, they chose to forgo the Panther's SRMs, and instead mounted a quartet of Magna MKII Medium Lasers, 2 per arm, allowing for not only a heavier punch but much quicker responsiveness in CQB scenarios. A pair of hand actuators were included to allow it better hand to hand capabilities, versatility as a raider, etc. As a final touch, a single 20mm chain gun was mounted just beneath the cockpit to deal with any infantry threats it might encounter in the Urban Battlefields it was intended for.


While a capable design, able to best Panthers and Jenners in combat trials, it was essentially too similar to the Panther's they were to be facing. It did last all the way to the final testing against TharHes Industries WLF-X Wolfhound design. There, the Wolfhounds greater speed and tactical flexibility was just too apparent, and as such, the contract was granted for the Wolfhound. The "Mini-MAD" as it had been dubbed, was to be shipped back to Kathil along with the nearly dozen prototypes, but the shipment was apparently hijacked en route, and never arrived back at the GM factories.

Thoughts?

I like it! Though, like others, I would have gone a slightly different route with the loadout.

Specifically, I would have gone with something of a "baby MAD-5D precursor" concept - switching-out the PPC for a Large Laser, and using the now-free weight (3 tons) to install a SRM-4 launcher (2 tons) and ammo (1 ton) in the Left Torso, while leaving everything else as-is.

As you later state with the Machine Gun, the SRM launcher could be loaded with different munitions for different mission profiles - standard (or dead-fire) rounds for anti-Mech/anti-armor combat, inferno rounds for dealing with infantry (and 'Mechs, and foliage, and unhardened structures & vehicles), smoke and tear-gas rounds for addressing riot scenarios (and infantry), and so on.

Granted, it loses a bit of long-range combat capability (the LLas has only 80% of the per-salvo damage output & 83% of the effective range of the PPC), but it loses the downside of the minimum range effect. Additionally, the 2 units of long-range damage lost from the PPC-LLas switch is replaced by 8 units of short-range damage from the addition of the SRM launcher (plus the previously-mentioned increase in operational flexibility), increasing the 'Mech's overall effectiveness at the closer ranges that should typify "the Urban Battlefields it was intended for" (especially with how the SRM launcher's range bands match those of the MLas).

Thoughts?

Edited by Strum Wealh, 11 September 2016 - 01:30 PM.

[Strum Wealh]

Also, how 'bout those Bushwackers?

[Odanan]

Strum Wealh, on 11 September 2016 - 02:14 PM, said:

Also, how 'bout those Bushwackers?

I was never a fan of the 'Wacker...

But with 8 weapon hardpoints, looks pretty solid.

[FLG 01]

I too was never a fan of this Mech, and I would have liked a different choice. It would have been better had the Bushwacker heralded the start of a new age of MWO with new tech. The PGI-invented reinforcement pack is just an unnecessary cash grab. Why not do the old-style 3-Pack plus HeroMech? That would have been much better.

But it is ok. After a year of TRO:3025, which began to bore me, it is a nice variation. It does have its rightful place in the lore of the early 50ies. It also looks how I imagine a Steiner machine of war: ugly, but functional. And quite menancing. The attack helicopter vibes were mentioned before and I really like that Alex emphasised that look.

As far as the in-game performance is concerned, I think that is quite accurate:



So... it is ok. Mixing ballistics and missiles could be fun. I have some nice builds in mind. I will get the basic pack. But not more.

Edited by FLG 01, 11 September 2016 - 06:21 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Strum Wealh, on 11 September 2016 - 01:24 PM, said:

I like it! Though, like others, I would have gone a slightly different route with the loadout.

Specifically, I would have gone with something of a "baby MAD-5D precursor" concept - switching-out the PPC for a Large Laser, and using the now-free weight (3 tons) to install a SRM-4 launcher (2 tons) and ammo (1 ton) in the Left Torso, while leaving everything else as-is.

As you later state with the Machine Gun, the SRM launcher could be loaded with different munitions for different mission profiles - standard (or dead-fire) rounds for anti-Mech/anti-armor combat, inferno rounds for dealing with infantry (and 'Mechs, and foliage, and unhardened structures & vehicles), smoke and tear-gas rounds for addressing riot scenarios (and infantry), and so on.

Granted, it loses a bit of long-range combat capability (the LLas has only 80% of the per-salvo damage output & 83% of the effective range of the PPC), but it loses the downside of the minimum range effect. Additionally, the 2 units of long-range damage lost from the PPC-LLas switch is replaced by 8 units of short-range damage from the addition of the SRM launcher (plus the previously-mentioned increase in operational flexibility), increasing the 'Mech's overall effectiveness at the closer ranges that should typify "the Urban Battlefields it was intended for" (especially with how the SRM launcher's range bands match those of the MLas).

Thoughts?

The minimum range isn't an issue because with 3025 tech it doesn't have the capacity to combine the Mlasers, SRM and LLaser, anyhow. Also, SRMs are substantially less effective/efficient against infantry. Also since general rules if I recall don't allow for mixed missile loads, one is stuck with whatever load they brought.

As it is, the PPC allows better range and punch, and "effective" accuracy. (as longer range means more time spent in more favorable range brackets) I just don't feel that an LL that I can't reasonably combine with my short range firepower makes for a good trade off.

[xVLFBERHxT]

What do you think about the crockett?

[Steinar Bergstol]

TrapJaw80, on 11 September 2016 - 10:53 PM, said:

What do you think about the crockett?

That Crockett looks like it has cockpit canopies installed on its feet, and now I can't unsee it!

[Odanan]

TrapJaw80, on 11 September 2016 - 10:53 PM, said:

What do you think about the crockett?

It's a very decent mech. 85 jumping mech with lots of variants and lots of hardpoints. It also has a distinct look.

If PGI stayed 1 more year with the 3025 mechs, I'm sure the Crockett/Katana would make it. Now, it is forever lost.

Steinar Bergstol, on 12 September 2016 - 12:38 AM, said:

That Crockett looks like it has cockpit canopies installed on its feet, and now I can't unsee it!

Don't. Ever. Do this. Again.

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 12 September 2016 - 01:20 AM, said:

It's a very decent mech. 85 jumping mech with lots of variants and lots of hardpoints. It also has a distinct look.

If PGI stayed 1 more year with the 3025 mechs, I'm sure the Crockett/Katana would make it. Now, it is forever lost.


Don't. Ever. Do this. Again.

MIA Forevermore?

Stinger
Wasp
Mongoose
Hermes
Hussar
Javelin
Valkyrie
Assassin
Clint
Hermes II
Sentinel
Vulcan
Whitworth
Champion
Grand Dragon
Lancelot
Ostroc
Ostsol
Crusader
Guillotine
Flashman
Charger
Hatamoto
Thug
Crockett

[Karl Streiger]

With each additional Mech the idea of the MechLab becomes more and more flawed.

Its already the name - "Hardpoint" like swapping a Bomb for a Missile with minimal wiring. Given StockMech the Bushwacker would have been a fine choice - because no other current 55t Mech would have his mission profile based on weapons.
But with a free MechLab?

One of my favs the Thug.... complete waste of development time to deliver it - everything the Thug is i can do with the Warhammer or with the Awesome, heck even with Victor or Zeus i can run the armament of the Thug.

Funny thing is i tried to run it on a Pretty Baby but this sucked - several convergence issues with PPCs.

[Odanan]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 September 2016 - 02:05 AM, said:

MIA Forevermore?

Stinger
Wasp
Mongoose
Hermes
Hussar
Javelin
Valkyrie
Assassin
Clint
Hermes II
Sentinel
Vulcan
Whitworth
Champion
Grand Dragon
Lancelot
Ostroc
Ostsol
Crusader
Guillotine
Flashman
Charger
Hatamoto
Thug
Crockett

Those I still have hope (sure not all will be in the game):

• Wasp (this is the most needed IS mech NOW)
  
• Crusader (one of the next IS mechs, probably)
  
• Charger
  
• Assassin
  
• Grand Dragon (as Dragon variant)
  
• Ostroc (hey, it might actually look super cool)

Those I can live without, but might appear in the game:

• Stinger
  
• Hatamoto (I prefer the Charger)
  
• Valkyrie (OK, the most low priority Macross Unseen of all, still a cool 30 tons missile focused mech)

And RIP:

• Mongoose
  
• Hermes
  
• Hussar
  
• Javelin
  
• Clint
  
• Hermes II
  
• Sentinel
  
• Vulcan
  
• Whitworth
  
• Champion
  
• Lancelot
  
• Ostsol
  
• Guillotine
  
• Flashman
  
• Thug
  
• Crockett

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 12 September 2016 - 02:18 AM, said:

Those I still have hope (sure not all will be in the game):

• Wasp (this is the most needed IS mech NOW)
  
• Crusader (one of the next IS mechs, probably)
  
• Charger
  
• Assassin
  
• Grand Dragon (as Dragon variant)
  
• Ostroc (hey, it might actually look super cool)

Those I can live without, but might appear in the game:

• Stinger
  
• Hatamoto (I prefer the Charger)
  
• Valkyrie (OK, the most low priority Macross Unseen of all, still a cool 30 tons missile focused mech)

And RIP:

• Mongoose
  
• Hermes
  
• Hussar
  
• Javelin
  
• Clint
  
• Hermes II
  
• Sentinel
  
• Vulcan
  
• Whitworth
  
• Champion
  
• Lancelot
  
• Ostsol
  
• Guillotine
  
• Flashman
  
• Thug
  
• Crockett

I'll take a Stinger over a Wasp all day, every day, and twice on Sunday!

[Odanan]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 September 2016 - 02:30 AM, said:

I'll take a Stinger over a Wasp all day, every day, and twice on Sunday!

Well, the IS 20 tons department has the Locust, with more energy+ballistic variants than energy+missile variants. And there is the Flea forever haunting us (with all energy+ballistic variants).

Wasp is mostly missile + energy or full energy (with 1 energy + ballistic).
Stinger is either ballistic + energy or full energy, with less canonical variants.

I think not only the Wasp is more iconic and common, but it is also more interesting with MWO in mind.

Analysis of the Wasp and Stinger.

(honestly, I want them both, specially if in the same package)

[Clownwarlord]

Next IS mech please?

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Hatamoto-Chi