1
What I haven't seen much discussion on, is what an Atlas is actually for. Well it's an assault mech, so obviously it's for assault and shooty boom boom right? Not very helpful though. Lots of mechs actually do a better job of either assaulting, or shooty boom boom (or both).
(because I'm bored - guess who is NOT in beta) I want to talk about what roles a large slow heavily armed and armored mech should take in your tactical considerations, and then theory-craft an optimal build to excel in that role.
The Atlas is a big, slow, lumbering target with a lot of mixed range firepower, in devastating amounts. It's a big target, and it won't be chasing anything down. Conversely it will be receiving a lot of attention on the battlefield, from range. Why would anyone want to pilot such an obvious target? (other than it looks like walking death and has a really big shooty canon?)
Two words. Area Denial.
If there is a place where you do not want the enemy to go, there is no better mech to stick right in the middle of that area than an Atlas. Need an objective guarded? This is your mech. It also functions well as the linchpin in a formation, giving light mechs and scouts a place to retreat from heavier hunters. It's slow speed is not a handicap in this role, and is actually a benefit, as lighter mechs can easily catch back up.
So how can the AS7-D more optimally fill it's role of area denial? (otherwise known as the "hell no you go first effect".)
The Atlas has some weak points. It is vulnerable at range, and it is vulnerable to swift moving flankers. Obviously no build can completely remove these factors (and if it could it would be nerfed) but things can be done to mitigate them.
Starting with the base chassis, a nearly full (armor can only be taken in minimum half ton increments and we don't want to waste tonnage) armored AS7-D with 10 heat sinks and a 3/5 movement weighs in at:
10 tons for internal structure - 19 tons for armor (304 out of a theoretical 307 maximum) - 19 tons for a STD 300 engine - 3 tons for a Gyro, 3 tons for a Cockpit, = 54 tons, leaving us 46 tons for consideration.
Assuming (purely for reasons of avoiding more speculation) that the hardpoints available are the same as the original weapons and nothing else, what weapon build would make the AS-7D more effective in an area denial role?
Well certainly hard hitting short ranged weapons are a must for the area denial role, after all if you can't intimidate another mech into not entering your zone of control, the build is less than optimal. But how to do it so that the current "weaknesses" of limited firepower at range and vulnerability to flanking are mitigated?
Without the ability to rear mount weapons (the ORIGINAL TT AS7-D had 2 rear facing Medium Lasers) the best option to discourage flanking is to reserve the arm mounts for anti-flanking capabilities. (I'm going to assume that the AS7-D does NOT have 2 CT energy Hardpoints, but that is an assumption).
Since the capability exists to only mount one energy weapon in each arm, it needs to be something that can near cripple a light flanker in a short period of time. A single Medium Laser is unlikely to serve that function and a PPC is overkill (as well as having a minimum range), so one obvious choice is the Large Laser. This has the added benefit of adding some more ranged capability to the AS-7D.
46 - 10 tons for 2 Large Lasers = 36 tons open.
Of course 2 Large Lasers isn't going to discourage anyone from closing with you, and frankly there is no better armament for keeping folks out of close range than what the Atlas already mounts- the venerable AC/20. With the minimum 2 tons of ammo you want for a credible threat:
36 - 16 tons for AC/20 + 10 shots of ammo = 20 tons (room to shove a locust in there...)
Heat is becoming a concern, so we definitely want to avoid anymore high heat weapons, while saving room for heatsinks. But we still need something to make harassing our mech from long range (at least long range outside the large lasers 450m retaliation capability) expensive.
Fortunately the AS7-D comes with a couple of missile hardpoints in it's left torso. LRMs are a good choice, but these will be useless for area denial due to the minimum range. But some capability for retaliation is mandatory. The question is, how much is optimal? Too large and you've wasted tonnage you could use to mitigate other factors. Too small and the capability for retaliation is negligible.
The original AS7-D mounts an LRM 20 and a SRM 6. The SRM is less useful from an intimidation standpoint, and will also be less useful for ant-flanking since it is torso mounted. So using both Hardpoints for LRMs is a defensible decision. Stacking 2 LRM 10's gives us the capability to at least appear a credible threat from LRM ranges, and allows for alternate firing of the weapons to conserve ammo and heat.
20 - 13 tons for 2 LRM 10 + 3 tons of ammo (1.5 tons each yields 18 shots each since ammo is assumedly able to be shared in game between like weapons ) = 7.
The remaining 7 tons is best used as heatsinks, giving us 17 total heatsinks, 3 less than the standard AS-7D. Heat management will be an issue but the extra capabilities should make up for the shortcoming. Of course, there's always the option to use advanced technology, but that incurs extra expense.
The question remains, is it more optimal at area denial than the original design? Without testing it's only theory, but we can review our assumptions.
With 3 distinct range bands any incoming single attacker other than another assault will likely be discouraged about the time they notice they are getting hit with Large Lasers (450m) and still haven't closed to within AC/20 range. Light flankers especially will be prone to retreat and find a less exposed avenue of attack.
Surprise attacks from the flank and rear will still be an issue, but being able to bring a Large Laser to bear instead of a single medium will be a benefit, especially when aiming at the legs. At that point a flanker has to consider wether they will be able to do enough damage before the risk of becoming crippled and unable to retreat becomes a factor. Or worse, being crippled and unable to avoid the arc of fire for the AC/20.
The substitution of 2 LRM 10's for 1 LRM 20 is probably the least palatable design decision. At LRM range the mech hasn't gained any significant retaliatory capability. But it hasn't lost any either. And it does have 6 more salvos than the original model, with the benefit of being able to alternate fire and keep up a more constant barrage with less heat.
When considering the original AS7-D the modification fills in the medium range gap in it's range bands without sacrificing very much in the way of short range firepower. The primary sacrifice is in the area of heat management. Advanced tech is one way to mitigate this, but it may not be necessary, depending on how the modification performs in the initial testing phase.
Edited by Xandre Blackheart, 14 July 2012 - 05:56 PM.
