40 replies to this topic

[ASC]

I've been looking around for a while and I can't really see whether we'll be seeing specialised or balanced lance configurations

Lets take a 3 lance drop (12mechs) as an example:

Do we see a scout lance, assault lance, and support lance?

Or maybe 3 lances with a mix, say 1scout, 1heavy, 1 assault, 1 supporting fire mech per lance.

Or do we see something in between: eg 1 heavy/assult lance, 1 hunter(heavy/mid) and 1 mixed (2 scout, 2 fire support)

Thoughts?

[Soviet Alex]

Personally, in Battletech I build lances based on speed, tonnage & mutually-supporting roles. Lances of 4 mechs all doing the same job are the exception rather than the rule. But that's just me.

[Thom Frankfurt]

Specialized lances are kinda like putting all your eggs in one basket IMO, and may leave to critical flaws

I likewise cobble lances together based on movement profile and tonnage...

[Kasechemui]

In my oppinion it wouldn't be clever to mix the lances. The scout mechs would be a weakpoint in the face to face combat and the heavy or assult mechs would thwart the scouts.
Specialized lances can work together: the scots run forward and do what they are named for and the assults do the cleaningjob supportet by an additional lance of fast heavy or strong medium mechs who haunt or flank the enemy.

(sorry for the bad english)

Edited by Kasechemui, 24 April 2012 - 04:05 AM.

[Pheonixwolf]

it's going to be similar to how Chrome Hounds went, there will be those who try doing a proper battle configuration and then there will be groups of 'super skilled' individuals running around, trying to solo lances.....

[Soviet Alex]

With Mech-Lab & pilot customization, we can really blur the lines between roles & traditional classifications. For example, the refitted Grand Dragon is as fast as a Commando. Does that make it a scout? The same is true of the new Centurion (which might just prove that the Commando is too slow ). If I was the commander organising 12 mechs into lances, I'd be looking first at speeds & weapon ranges, not what the Technical Readout says each mech should do.

[Belisarius1]

Specialisation is always better.

Edited by Belisarius†, 24 April 2012 - 04:00 AM.

[ASC]

Of course any grouping would be done by role, not tonnage.


The advantage to specialisation will really come from co-ordination, and how the command structure aids lance level tactics. I suppose it comes to whether tactics are being done on the Lance level or the overall command level - and how complex it is for the commander.

on a side note, how would you divide firesuppot/LRM boats in the group? with scouts so they can tag targets, or distributed with main combat units to bring them into the lance-level communication and .better protection

[BerserX]

I would like to see lances that are balanced/mixed, based upon what their general role is. From my experience with the BT universe, lances were organized to cover each other's weaknesses. You had some lighter, faster scouting 'Mechs, mixed with heavier, brawling 'Mechs. However, there were also specialized lances, just as we see in MW4 (and I'm sure, the other games).

Assuming that we could have one setup, though: I would have to say that specialized lances sounds the most feasible. We could have something similar to the BattleField 2 squad screen. There would be a command lance (Alpha Lance), an assault lance (Bravo Lance), and a scout lance (Charlie Lance). These three lances would interact with each other, to optimize their potential.

Now, just because there are only three lance, and 4 'Mechs per lance, doesn't mean that only 4 commander roles, 4 assault roles, and 4 scout roles can join the game. There may be room for more players, as well - just as in BF2. For instance (I believe that there are supposed to be 16 players per team?), there could be 6 scouts that join, filling the scout lance, and then taking up spots in either of the remaining lances. Then, 2 assaults join (talking about roles - not necessarily 'Mechs), and jump into the assault lance. 3 commanders then round out the assault lance, and almost fill their own lance (now, we're up to eleven players). Then, 3 more assaults join, and two of the scouts decide that they don't want to be part of a lance. The assaults may choose to finish-out the lances, while the scouts simply fill two of the remaining player cap slots, as lone wolves. This hypothetical scenario would enable close-knit teamwork between the lances, while enabling anyone who wanted to fight solo, to do so.

It's not a perfect system, but it ought to work pretty well.

[Shepherd]

I expect specialized lances, if not entire companies specialized into a single type of combat. i.e. PPC boats or other long range direct fire approaches to battle.

However, I think there are better approaches. Given a full company of 12 mechs, here's my take on things:
You'll want a scouting lance, 2 lights built for speed/electronics, and two fast mediums as pickets (counter the enemy scouts)
You'll want a strike lance. This will be the preference of whomever is the best at direct fighting. Could be assaults or heavies, maybe mediums tossed in there.
You'll want a support lance. Out of those 4 mechs, I suspect that one or two may be dedicated missile support, and the balance will be a mixture of missile support and direct fire. I suspect that these mechs will be mediums and heavies.

But all of that will change based on the map. Tighter quarters will raise the value of heavies and assaults because they have the firepower to do massive damage to a single target by themselves. Open terrain will raise the value on all of the long-ranged mechs, etc.

And then there is the metagame to consider. Most teams will probably be heavy-centric, so you'll have to build your company around that to an extent - you'll have to bring something powerful enough to punch through all of that heavy armor, and tough enough to withstand all of that firepower - OR clever enough to outfox all of the slow heavies.

Edit: There's also going to be a heavy bias towards MW4 style of play from the get-go. Time will tell if the old paradigms will hold in MWO, but people are going to begin playing as though they will, which for a time will create a feeling that the old paradigms DO still hold. Which means that people will trend towards assaults with long ranged direct fire weaponry.

Edited by Shepherd, 24 April 2012 - 04:27 AM.

[BerserX]

ASC, on 24 April 2012 - 04:08 AM, said:

Of course any grouping would be done by role, not tonnage.


The advantage to specialisation will really come from co-ordination, and how the command structure aids lance level tactics. I suppose it comes to whether tactics are being done on the Lance level or the overall command level - and how complex it is for the commander.

on a side note, how would you divide firesuppot/LRM boats in the group? with scouts so they can tag targets, or distributed with main combat units to bring them into the lance-level communication and .better protection

Missile boats should be in the scout lance, or their own. Theoretically, they should also be scout roles, to maximize their potential. Imagine being able to tag four different 'Mechs, at the same time, and give them a withering barrage of LRMs!

This is all theoretical.

[Trevnor]

I have a funny feeling that there will be some specialized lances, and other mixed lances. With a specialized lance, you have the benefit of all the 'mechs in the lance moving at about the same speed, and being able to do the same things, such as scouting. On the other hand, a mixed lance has the flexibility that lacks in a specialized lance. They can adapt much faster to a changing battle, and each lance mate as a certain role. For example, in a mixed lance, lets say there is a scout with TAG, a Catapult, a heavy, and a medium. The heavy and mediums provide fire support and flanking support for each other and the Catapult, and the scout can go ahead and tag enemies for the Catapults LRM's. That would be a lance type that I would roll in, just because that one lance can do the job of three specialized lances.

[Virgil Caine]

Actually, in Battletech the vast majority of lances were not 'mixed'. They were in a weight class, and had designated roles. Didn't have Commandos lining up with Atlases in the same lance. The MechCommander games, and Mechwarrior videogames notwithstanding...

In the real world, platoons are built for a specific duty, (Platoon would be equivalent to a lance) A tank platoon for instance, has four tanks, and the tanks have pretty much identical capability, the reason is so you don't need that specific guy to do the specific thing. They all have the 120mm, They all have the .50 cal... etc.

It's far more effective for lances to be divided up by role, rather than having some chimeric lance that's trying to recon-support-assault all in one, and generally sucking at all of them.

Say in a situation where you are defending a hill. You got one guy in the trees with an AC20, one guy on the hill with LRMS, A guy further in doing recon, and a guy with jump jets to harass. It's too fragile, cause if you lose a guy, you lose ALL CAPABILITY in that area...

Well, the enemy's coming to take the hill, and they have four guys with AC10s.. and LRM10s. You drop one, the other three can take up the slack.

They combine fire on the recon guy, dead.... there goes your eyes... Combine fire on the LRM20 guy... dead.... What's left? Guy with the AC20 comes out, maybe takes one out, and the other three combine fire on him, kill him... move on.... jump jet guy's at a 3-1 odds, he's dead.

1 Guy with an LRM20, not that big a threat, 4 guys with LRM20s, on a hill, are a serious threat.
1 Guy with a Gauss Rifle may be trouble... 4 Guys with Gauss Rifles...

In theory you can have his specialization going on with four guys super-specializing in four different things. But in practice it's far more effective to spread your capabilities out among all members of your unit, cause it's combat, you take losses.

4 guys with LRM5s, do just as much damage as 1 guy with an LRM20, except that if you kill one of them, it doesn't remove your whole LRM capability.

So in the Inner Sphere, lances are devided up by role...

Recon Lances = 4 Mechs designated for information warfare, and light fire-support missions.
Attack Lances = 4 Mechs Advancing with direct-fire hard hitting medium-close ranged weaponry. (AC-10/20s, LPLS, PPCs etc.)
Fire Support Lances = 4 Mechs designated for raining hellfire down on the enemy. LRMs + some Medium Lasers to defend
Heavy Support Lances = 4 Mechs designated for long range big punch weapons, Gauss, ERPPC, With some LRM support in there too.

[CPTAmerica]

I tend to build my lances similar to an infantry fire team (Team Leader, Automatic Rifleman, Grenadier, Rifleman/Marksman). I translate this as more of a role each mech will play in the lance. The lance as a whole will be loosely based on the role it fills within the company.

General lance parameters are determined on commander's intent for unit:
Speed: Commander determines the minimum speed capability for the lance (ie. > 96kph)
Agility: Does the lance require jump capability, non-jump capable, or optional
Weight: Range in tonnage for 'mech choices within the lance.

Individual 'mech assignments are based more on warrior role in fire team/lance:
Team Leader: typically a well ballanced 'mech capable of filling another role should a lance member be destroyed in combat. While not the best in any one particular role within the lance, the team leader is flexible enough pick up any necessary slack.

Lance Support (automatic rifleman): This 'mech is designed to provide suppressive and/or long range supportive fire for lance operations. If the unit is based more for urban warfare or combat against conventional forces a barrage of SRMs would be sufficient to fill this role. If the unit finds itself fighting more open field engagements, an LRM system would be better. (no I am not limiting this 'mech's firepower to missiles. those were just examples about range ability within the role) The biggest key is to be able to put rounds on target accurately and continuously in effort to "keep your opponent honest". It does not have to be a one shot one kill system although it would be nice. This 'mech's job is to let the enemy know that they will take damage if they come at the lance. They also are used to distract the enemy from the movements of lance mates who may be manuevering into a more advantageous firing position or trying to withdrawl from a hard engagement.

Brawler (grenadier): The 'mech which fills this role is designed to be all offense. This warrior and his/her 'mech has the capability of dealing the highest damage potential in the shortest amount of time. Sometimes this might be from a single weapons system and sometimes from multiple weapons with a devestating alpha strike. In one on one combat against a 'mech of similar weight class, this 'mech has the ability to bring the enemy down in a single salvo.

Lance Specialist (rifleman/marksman): This 'mech is all about maximizing a specific niche. If you are recon then, lots of electronic warfare equipment (ex. Raven). If you are fire support then, a massive load out of long ranged weapons (ex. Rifleman, Jaggermech, Archer, Catapult). Basicly, this is the slot that actually identifies your lance's capability. You want a second "Brawler" then you are now an assault lance. You want a second "Lance Support" 'mech then you are now a support lance. You want another balanced 'mech then you are now a general light, medium, heavy, or assault weight lance.

Anyway...this make up works really well in TT and, it did very well in MPBT when I played there.

Edited by CPTAmerica, 24 April 2012 - 04:47 AM.

[Sassori]

In TT battletech the mech commander used whatever mechs he had available. Period. While there are different classes of mechs the ability to make whole lances out of a class of mech is not always feasible.

In TT we always had tonnage limits, say we had two hundred tons, there would be people taking two 100 tonners, then you'd have the people who mixed things up a bit. In general specialization was a weakness because once out of that specialized element, it's all over. What happens when a fast moving and hard hitting medium or heavy gets into the middle of your fire support lance? They're done. LRM's are not friendly at intimate ranges. This is why it's always good to have some mix in a lance.

For me a Scout lance would consist of say 2 fast mechs like locusts or jenners preferably with some ECM, a light fire support mech to bring some initial rain of pain and distraction with good speed, and a fast moving medium as the command mech. That way you can have C3 for all the mechs in the lance, and tie that C3 in with the main command mech so everyone see's everything.

Fire Support Lance would have 2 long range missile boats or ERPPC, think Archer/Catapult/Awesome (Cuz PPC's aren't exactly short range) and the like. It would have one fast medium mech to play interference for the long range mechs and it'd have a general all purpose heavy mech that could provide fire at all ranges (The Marauder and Warhammer excelled at this) to play body guard and throw additional fire where needed.

The Heavy Assault is your Hammer and Anvil. Hard hitting heavies and assaults with a medium to play foil and bait.

This is how you have specialized lances with mixed mechs within them. No lance works on it's own, but /all/ are capable of working on their own if they have to.

If you overspecialize you're setting yourself up to be thrashed as you're creating weaknesses the enemy can exploit.

[Kezran Vrass]

Kasechemui, on 24 April 2012 - 03:52 AM, said:

In my oppinion it wouldn't be clever to mix the lances. The scout mechs would be a weakpoint in the face to face combat and the heavy or assult mechs would thwart the scouts.
Specialized lances can work together: the scots run forward and do what they are named for and the assults do the cleaningjob supportet by an additional lance of fast heavy or strong medium mechs who haunt or flank the enemy.

(sorry for the bad english)

Kasechemui, on 24 April 2012 - 03:52 AM, said:

In my oppinion it wouldn't be clever to mix the lances. The scout mechs would be a weakpoint in the face to face combat and the heavy or assult mechs would thwart the scouts.
Specialized lances can work together: the scots run forward and do what they are named for and the assults do the cleaningjob supportet by an additional lance of fast heavy or strong medium mechs who haunt or flank the enemy.

(sorry for the bad english)

Us Scots run forward and kill the enemy



and yes i know what was ment

[ASC]

From the sounds of it we're going to be looking at lots of semi-speciallised lances.

What i mean by that is that all lances seem to have at least 2 mechs which excell at the desired role for the lance, and usually at least 1 mech which can cover for the group if it is taken out of its comfort zone.

as such:
Scout lance: 3 scout optimised mechs + 1 dragon to back them up (or 2-2 balance). Or 2 scouts, 1 escort, 1 LRM boat to take advantage or scout targeting?

Brawler lance: mechs which can go toe to toe with anything at mid/short range for maxium damage, backed with at least 1 mech which can engage well at long range to keep long range harrassers from being able to whittle the group down.

fire support lance: 2-3 long range specialists, with at least 1 strong mech which maintains strong firepower as the range closes.


Though it hasn't really been mentioned here i can also see some people deploying fast responce lances with relitively fast med/hvy mechs to catch opposing mechs who find themselves out of formation or to quickly back up allies. maybe focus on 1 with particularly high speed - 2 with a firepower focus, and 1 long range/LRM specialist.

On a side note, in these sort of configurations, where do you see the command mech?

[Sassori]

Personally I want a command mech in every lance, so that the whole battle group has access to C3, but that's just me.

[ASC]

Christopher Dayson, on 24 April 2012 - 07:06 AM, said:

Personally I want a command mech in every lance, so that the whole battle group has access to C3, but that's just me.

Well yes, its already been announed that there should be one commander in charge of each Lance, one of which is the total force commander (if i've got my fact right here). My question was ment to be asking whether the lance commander should be among the 'specialist' type roles with the lance, or escort/guard/suppot, or even in a 2 specialist-1escort/guard/suppot-1commander formation.

As its something which can work either way i was just curious how people were expecting it to be arranged.

... and it might make a difference to attack targetting priority if people start working out trends.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

We won't have C3 at this point in the timeline but we will have the "BattleGrid", for which we have few details but it does seem to have shared data within a certain range. Where you have pre-arranged groups makeup will be one thing. What interests and worries me is PUGs where the makeup is purely down to the matchmaker. I can see specialised mechs being at a disadvantage here as you are reliant on possibly non-existant support. If the format is based on BV, tonnage, C-bills then you could ens up with a total mish mash of mechs with pilots who don;t know each other and have never played together before. Partly this will be balanced if the opposition is in the same boat.
If you choose your mech first, before knowing any details, which is a possibility, then life could be interesting.