32 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

what if BattleMech could removed their Hand / Arm Actuators?
(to my knowledge theirs no TT Rules for such)

that said what if you could, with some Rules of course,
1) their is a cost associated with it, lets say 1,000,000 C-Bills,
2) you have to Add/Remove them both together(no just removing Hand Actuators)

that said what builds do you see this opening up?
what Builds would you Run on your Mechs?

=(POLL)=

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 03 February 2018 - 10:49 AM.

[FupDup]

Double UAC/5 on a Dragon or Wolverine with UAC quirks would be nice. Nightstars would love it...

Otherwise, in general just yank out all the actuators for maximum critslot cramming.

Edited by FupDup, 03 February 2018 - 10:40 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Would it allow me to have LBX20 or Heavy Gauss in the arm?
If so, then yes I would pay cbills for such a thing.

Also if you could remove the arm actuators would that give the Dragon the high arm point (basically a gun mount on rotating shoulder) that so many have begged for
If so, then yes I would pay cbills for such a thing.

[Andi Nagasia]

personally id love to run a AC20 on my CN9s,

[FupDup]

Bud Crue, on 03 February 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

Would it allow me to have LBX20 or Heavy Gauss in the arm?
If so, then yes I would pay cbills for such a thing.

Also if you could remove the arm actuators would that give the Dragon the high arm point (basically a gun mount on rotating shoulder) that so many have begged for
If so, then yes I would pay cbills for such a thing.

You can't remove the upper arm actuator, so no LB 20-X or HGR in the arms for you. Plus, the HGR is supposed to generate so much recoil that arm-mounting is impossible even if you had the slots for it.

[Andi Nagasia]

FupDup, on 03 February 2018 - 10:47 AM, said:

You can't remove the upper arm actuator, so no LB 20-X or HGR in the arms for you. Plus, the HGR is supposed to generate so much recoil that arm-mounting is impossible even if you had the slots for it.

yup their are Lore Horror stories about testing such and it ripping the arms off Mech when fired,

[C E Dwyer]

Lets throw balance even more to the wind while we do it

[Eddrick]

I wouldn't use it. But, I wouldn't mind seeing the option be available.

Edited by Eddrick, 03 February 2018 - 10:52 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Cathy, on 03 February 2018 - 10:51 AM, said:

Lets throw balance even more to the wind while we do it

actually nothing to do with balance, proposing this as a way to perhaps implement Crit Splitting,
because you know a CN9 could mount a AC20 in its Right arm in TT, because of Crit Splitting,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 03 February 2018 - 11:28 AM.

[FLG 01]

There are no canon rules about removing actuators (in TT that's a straight downgrade anyway). However: we can do Class F refits on the fly like changing the internal structure, and it is actually the highest level of refit which needs factory-grade facilities.
If we can do that removing an actuator should not be a problem.

[Bombast]

I'd say yes to automatically removing hands from everything (Because they serve no purpose), no to actuators.

[Andi Nagasia]

Bombast, on 03 February 2018 - 11:45 AM, said:

I'd say yes to automatically removing hands from everything (Because they serve no purpose), no to actuators.

well the idea would be to make both linked so its both or nether,
as well as allow builds possible in TT through Crit Splitting, which would open options,

[Khobai]

I would rather see hand actuators actually do something, than allow battlemechs to remove them.

1) some mechs have hand actuators to block certain weapons like AC20s from being used in the arms
2) some mechs would look stupid without hands
3) since there would be no reason not to remove hands, people would have to start asking, where did all the hands go? is there a future version of edmund kemper running around cutting off all the hands?

but as hand actuators do take up a crit slot, they should do something relatively minor. Like +5%-10% hillclimbing per hand. that would make two hand actuators the equivalent of 1-2 extra skill points into hill climbing.

Quote

actually nothing to do with balance, proposing this as a way to perhaps implement Crit Splitting,
because you know a CN9 could mount a AC20 in its Right arm in TT, because of Crit Splitting,

you dont need to have removeable hands to add crit splitting. in fact adding crit splitting would eliminate the need for removeable hands. although were never getting critsplitting anyway.

but removeable hands is a very bad idea anyway. because thered be no reason not to remove the hands on every mech. so no mech would ever have hands again. thats quite frankly dumb since a lot of mechs are supposed to have hands.

the better idea is to justify the existence of hand actuators by making them do something worth 1 crit slot.

Quote

I wouldn't use it. But, I wouldn't mind seeing the option be available.

why wouldnt you? youd gain two free crit slots with no downside.

the problem is its not an option. everyone would automatically do it on every mech they could.

because its two free crit slots and lets you fit more ISDHS in the arms.

the very fact its not an option is what makes it a dumb idea.

just say NO to everyone running around without hands. that would ruin the aesthetics of the game.

Edited by Khobai, 03 February 2018 - 12:29 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Khobai, on 03 February 2018 - 12:11 PM, said:

I would rather see hand actuators actually do something, than allow battlemechs to remove them.

1) some mechs have hand actuators to block certain weapons like AC20s from being used in the arms
2) some mechs would look stupid without hands
3) since there would be no reason not to remove hands, people would have to start asking, where did all the hands go? is there a future version of edmund kemper running around cutting off all the hands?

but as hand actuators do take up a crit slot, they should do something relatively minor. Like +5%-10% hillclimbing per hand. that would make two hand actuators the equivalent of 1-2 extra skill points into hill climbing.

agreed, but this was a simple idea to perhaps solve the crit Splitting problem,

1) well not really as many mechs took AC20s in their arms which was possible due to crit splitting,
2) agreed,
3) well my idea was link them to Lower arm actuators, if you want to remove them its both or nether, as a reason,

Agreed, on last point,

Khobai, on 03 February 2018 - 12:11 PM, said:

you dont need to have removeable hands to add crit splitting. in fact adding crit splitting would eliminate the need for removeable hands. although were never getting critsplitting anyway.

but removeable hands is a very bad idea anyway. because thered be no reason not to remove the hands on every mech. so no mech would ever have hands again. that is quite frankly dumb since a lot of mechs are supposed to have hands.

the better idea is to justify the existence of hand actuators by making them do something worth 1 crit slot.

well the idea would be make them linked to Lower Arm Actuators, so its both or Nether,
this would give removing hands and LowerArm Actuators a Penalty and Benefit(+2Crits for -Arm Turn)

Khobai, on 03 February 2018 - 12:11 PM, said:

why wouldnt you use it? youd gain two free crit slots with no downside.

the problem is its not an option. everyone would automatically do it on every mech they could.

because its two free crit slots and lets you fit more ISDHS in the arms.

the very fact its not an option is what makes it a dumb idea.

the down side would be the loss of Arm motion, so their is a penalty attached to that Bonus?
at most thats 1DHS in each the arm assuming you have 1spare Crit in those arms already,
and will +2DHS on an IS Energy Boat really make all that much difference?

[Nema Nabojiv]

No problem if its removed from both arms I guess. The game doesnt handle the situation when r.arm have no LAA and l.arm have LAA and a weapon, and so you can shoot your ac20 as if you had both arms with free movement (summoner).

[Josh Seles]

For hand actautors: yes, absolutely yes. Because they only take up valuable slots. No other function.
Lower arm actuators: not so much, because side-to-side firing is good.

Mechs short on space would like this. Nightstar comes to mind.
Being able to fit a PPC and 2 DHS in any IS mech's arms would also be nice.

[InvictusLee]

Quad LB10x's in the arms? Hell yes!

[Leone]

If so I request the option to add lower arm and hand actuators. It's only fair.

~Leone.

[Spheroid]

You further disincentivise Omni vs. battlemechs. Lets not go there.

[Andi Nagasia]

Spheroid, on 03 February 2018 - 12:53 PM, said:

You further disincentivise Omni vs. battlemechs. Lets not go there.

actually that reminds me of something, does anyone know, could both Omni & BattleMechs Crit Split weapons?