You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 09, 2016, 02:01:02 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Battletech  (Read 10480 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jack StrykerTopic starter

Re: Battletech
« Reply #175 on: March 24, 2010, 06:59:40 PM »
The 3050's are the time I most enjoy.  Inner Sphere soldiers fighting a technologically superior enemy, and after failure after failure, begin to hand the Clanners' collective hindquarters to them on a silver platter.

Offline HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Battletech
« Reply #176 on: March 24, 2010, 07:34:18 PM »
I dunno about that. If Tukayyid hadn't bought them all those years to tool up, it might have been a fairly different story.

Offline Anathanasia

Re: Battletech
« Reply #177 on: March 24, 2010, 08:33:56 PM »
Blech, I hated the whole Clans thing, for a few reasons, but mainly I just didn't like the warrior-centric culture developing out of the remains of the Star League. Sure, it was less predictable than a happy utopian society, but it's just always felt so overdone to me.

Second most, I hated the bump to technology. I didn't mind the Grey Death Legion finding the memory core, but it felt like things came up out of the gritty dark ages way too fast. Too much like a magic pill that solved a big "problem" for the Inner Sphere. I use quotes there because I didn't think of it as a problem, it was a core part of what I enjoyed so much about the atmosphere of the setting.

I liked Battletech a lot more when it would have been a very rare thing to get given a replacement mech if you lost yours. That whole Dispossessed thing, you know? And the idea that mechwarriors were special at least in great part because they had a mech, this ultimate war machine, to leverage themselves into being the core supporters of their House ruler, their lord, like knights or samurai, to some degree. And like knights or samurai, they were defined by their armour and/or weapon. The idea that a lord could only hold power if he/she had the support of enough mechwarriors, that quasi feudal feel it had in the good old days, was part of what drew me into the universe from the start.

All that just flew out the window when there was this huge influx of lostech and suddenly every Successor State was getting production lines up into full gear and issuing mechs like a common rifle...at least, that's how it felt to me.

I liked it best when mechwarriors wouldn't fight last man standing all the damn time (if you played campaign style where repairs cost money and parts were scarce), and would retreat from the field when they knew they'd lost.

I doubt I would have really gotten into Battletech if my first experience with it was after the Clan invasion.

/rant

 ;D

Offline RubySlippers

Re: Battletech
« Reply #178 on: March 24, 2010, 08:45:51 PM »
That is why the battle game is different from the role-play. I remember at GenCon they had a 400t limit on units and allowed customs. I had 40 x 10t mechs really crappy. Well I evaded the enemy and when there was two damage mechs left I did a death charge shooting at the mech with Rocket Launcher - 10's and then rammed the mech in clusters like hobbits in LOTR would go after an ogre. I won but it hurt. In a rpg no pilot would do that hell most would have a truce after it was clear they might starting losing mechs.

I always liked trading up you start with a rolled up PC 30t mech and after defeating a bigger one took the bigger one over after repairs.

BTW my artys takes one out I want the mech for my team at least for parts. Maybe I can add to my untis a tossed together armored vehicle or small mech for anti-personnel work. I could get lucky on a big one but I expect to paste some lighter ones or amrored vehicles.

Offline Jack StrykerTopic starter

Re: Battletech
« Reply #179 on: March 24, 2010, 10:07:20 PM »
Well, my first battletech experience came from playing Mechwarrior 2 when I was 10.  After Mechwarrior 4 came out, I started reading the books, starting with Stackpole's Blood of Kerensky.  That's what really got me into CBT.

What I didn't like was when you have the era of the Word of Blake jihad.  While I wouldn't have much against toasting wobblies, the Dark Age afterward kind of lost the magic of the succession wars and clan wars era.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2010, 10:09:11 PM by Jack Stryker »

Offline RubySlippers

Re: Battletech
« Reply #180 on: March 25, 2010, 01:14:28 PM »
How much is arty's it might be worth pasting some mechs and selling parts the company doesn't need for extra Tom Tom's. Hummmm ....

Offline HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Battletech
« Reply #181 on: March 25, 2010, 03:36:57 PM »
Artillery tends to be pretty inaccurate I believe. I wouldn't count on it being sniper fire :)

Offline Fieryone

Re: Battletech
« Reply #182 on: March 25, 2010, 03:47:10 PM »
Well, the Artillery fire can still be used for say... hitting a rather large area and keep enemy forces from advancing.

Also, I can't wait for this to start, I'm a Friend of Jacks so I sent him all my stuff already, I'll be using a Centurion. I believe it's the best damn Medium Mech... I blame Yen-lo-wang for that.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: Battletech
« Reply #183 on: March 25, 2010, 04:04:36 PM »
Agreed. I'd appreciate if you aimed your Long Toms somewhere else, not close to my valuable and expensive assault lances...

Offline The Great Triangle

Re: Battletech
« Reply #184 on: March 25, 2010, 04:51:26 PM »
Personally, I kind of like the dark age era where there are functioning mech production lines, but the FTL communication network doesn't function, so mechs simply can't get distributed evenly enough for non industrialized planets to break out of feudalism. 

The clans being factions on an even level with the Inner Sphere is pretty cool to me too, though the "Timber Wolves for everyone!" Aesthetic and the collossal mechs are kind of lame.   

Offline Jack StrykerTopic starter

Re: Battletech
« Reply #185 on: March 25, 2010, 04:58:25 PM »
I don't think the inner sphere ever quite caught up to the Clans.  they could match the range of some weapons, but none quite had the power that clanner weapons posessed.  And for Battle Armor, nothing has ever been quite good enough to match the original Elemental.

Like the Gauss Rifle.  The Light Gauss more than matches the Clanner version, but doesn't deal as much damage, whereas the Heavy Gauss more than matches the firepower, but the range is like half that of the clanner one.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 05:01:20 PM by Jack Stryker »

Offline RubySlippers

Re: Battletech
« Reply #186 on: March 25, 2010, 05:04:46 PM »
Artillery tends to be pretty inaccurate I believe. I wouldn't count on it being sniper fire :)

Modern artillery with GPS and range finding can drop a shell ON a target at miles away I saw this on a dvd from the NOVA tv series a few weeks ago. And these are not WW2 weapons but I assume decent tech better than what we have. I assume that the tech in the Mech vers is better than ours now. In fact the Swedish have a mobile arty that can move, fire very accurately with LOS and move working in any kind of weather and move at speed. Shells close to the Sniper Arty I would think.

So lets see 30 drop sensor units, good triangulation and/or range finding from her Ferret (read it its a very nice VTOL in its description) she could likely dropa shell ON a large slo moving mech. True for infantry she would area bombard and faster vehicles and mechs it would be more guessy unless say a wheeled vehicle on a road in a area they can't maneuver well it would be guessy. But what do you think I'd target the faster scout mechs or the 100t walking death first moving at a slow rate and can't evade?  ;)


Offline HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Battletech
« Reply #187 on: March 25, 2010, 05:10:11 PM »
Actually I'd say the ballistic tech is probably worse than what we have today. I know that in the board game artillery tends to be very much pot luck, especially since it can take several turns to arrive. Of course, anything under it when it does arrive really won't enjoy the experience :)

Offline Jack StrykerTopic starter

Re: Battletech
« Reply #188 on: March 25, 2010, 05:12:40 PM »
Modern artillery with GPS and range finding can drop a shell ON a target at miles away I saw this on a dvd from the NOVA tv series a few weeks ago. And these are not WW2 weapons but I assume decent tech better than what we have. I assume that the tech in the Mech vers is better than ours now. In fact the Swedish have a mobile arty that can move, fire very accurately with LOS and move working in any kind of weather and move at speed. Shells close to the Sniper Arty I would think.

So lets see 30 drop sensor units, good triangulation and/or range finding from her Ferret (read it its a very nice VTOL in its description) she could likely dropa shell ON a large slo moving mech. True for infantry she would area bombard and faster vehicles and mechs it would be more guessy unless say a wheeled vehicle on a road in a area they can't maneuver well it would be guessy. But what do you think I'd target the faster scout mechs or the 100t walking death first moving at a slow rate and can't evade?  ;)

I saw the special on that, and they have a rather cool thing where they fire at a certain angle, drop the barrel down, fire again, and repeat the process three more times before packing up and moving.  With the different angles being shot at, all five shells will impact the target at roughly the exact same time, essentially turning 1 mobile arty into 5 guns. 

From the books, I believe artillery is actually quite accurate.  Even in the vietnam war, american artillery assets were very accurate, down to where it could provide a wall of shells mere yards away from dug-in infantry.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: Battletech
« Reply #189 on: March 25, 2010, 05:15:08 PM »
Artillery doesn't usually aim at mobile targets though except in large-battery area saturation - you can aim at coordinate with pinpoint location, but the shells have a travel time, and they can't correct midflight (Thunderbolt or Arrow missiles might though). So it's quite possible that your "100 ton walking death machine" isn't where you aimed at when the shot lands, since it's still walking at a potential 50+ kph. Using them for tactical support fire could be even worse; not only is it likely that the intended target has moved, it's almost as likely that a friendly 'mech has taken its place, if it's a close-range duel between lances...and if the burst radius from the shot landing is large enough to hit even if the target has moved, it's likely to clip the friendly anyways.

Offline Jack StrykerTopic starter

Re: Battletech
« Reply #190 on: March 25, 2010, 05:19:42 PM »
Artillery doesn't usually aim at mobile targets though except in large-battery area saturation - you can aim at coordinate with pinpoint location, but the shells have a travel time, and they can't correct midflight (Thunderbolt or Arrow missiles might though). So it's quite possible that your "100 ton walking death machine" isn't where you aimed at when the shot lands, since it's still walking at a potential 50+ kph. Using them for tactical support fire could be even worse; not only is it likely that the intended target has moved, it's almost as likely that a friendly 'mech has taken its place, if it's a close-range duel between lances...and if the burst radius from the shot landing is large enough to hit even if the target has moved, it's likely to clip the friendly anyways.

That's why you have to use it carefully.  If my force is advancing on the enemy, and the enemy is coming out to meet me, my artillery can fire ahead of us, and begin tracking each successive barrage about a hundred meters each time.  This way, I push the enemy back as my forces advance with near impunity, and if the advance is controlled enough the 'mechs can be walking through freshly made craters before the dust even settles, which has the further advantage of masking where our units even are.

Offline TheGlyphstone

Re: Battletech
« Reply #191 on: March 25, 2010, 05:27:29 PM »
That's why you have to use it carefully.  If my force is advancing on the enemy, and the enemy is coming out to meet me, my artillery can fire ahead of us, and begin tracking each successive barrage about a hundred meters each time.  This way, I push the enemy back as my forces advance with near impunity, and if the advance is controlled enough the 'mechs can be walking through freshly made craters before the dust even settles, which has the further advantage of masking where our units even are.

Well, sure, but that's how artillery is meant to be used - as suppression and saturation. Not for 'sniping' enemy mechs (even for salvage rights), which is where this whole thing started. Trying to land pinpoint shots on targets' heads just has too high of a risk of missing, especially when it's "my" pilots that are at risk of not-so-friendly fire. :D

Offline Jack StrykerTopic starter

Re: Battletech
« Reply #192 on: March 25, 2010, 05:29:40 PM »
Well, sure, but that's how artillery is meant to be used - as suppression and saturation. Not for 'sniping' enemy mechs (even for salvage rights), which is where this whole thing started. Trying to land pinpoint shots on targets' heads just has too high of a risk of missing, especially when it's "my" pilots that are at risk of not-so-friendly fire. :D

Heh, it's the old saying.  Friendly fire isn't.

I wouldn't think of using artillery to take down one 'mech.  It could be used for funneling 'mechs where you want them to go, but I agree.  Unless the 'mech is standing perfectly still, or travelling a set path and hasn't been alerted to incoming fire, there's no chance of taking it down even with cluster shots.

Offline RubySlippers

Re: Battletech
« Reply #193 on: March 25, 2010, 06:42:04 PM »
The range of the arty is in maps, odds are I'd fire on such a mech well away from any advancing forces on our side. I didn't say this would be easy but with the tech for detection and calculations by computers with some of her own instincts (she does have spotting as a special skill set and using the electroncis she has) she could do some damage. If figure my job is to soften up the big mechs not kill them but if I manage to take out the head ...

I figure more likely once you engage I'd redirect my attention to cover you maps off from flanking forces and take out infantry with area fire when I can use all six guns to pound on hex when they ar deploying forces, that would be ideal wait until a APC stops and deploys then pound the infantry.  ;)

I'm sure I can handle targeting two or three hexes away from friendlies even modern arty is more accurate then that ever see We Were Soldiers they could drop it close and they had far less tech to work with.

Offline HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Battletech
« Reply #194 on: March 25, 2010, 06:46:37 PM »
Take it from a wargamer .. don't try comparing real world with wargames. You'll just end up with a headache :)

Offline RubySlippers

Re: Battletech
« Reply #195 on: March 25, 2010, 06:53:22 PM »
I'm just saying of a few light mechs are moving to one flank and no one is to close say 3 or 6 hexes away I could drp shells along its likely movement and do some damage, without hitting any friendlies. If our infantry is running around well she won't fire unless ordered to in that area.

Offline RubySlippers

Re: Battletech
« Reply #196 on: March 25, 2010, 09:08:26 PM »
Here is an example of a tactic we could use. Say your fighting and blast a leg so bad the mech falls on its face. Why should you take more risk withdraw and move on to fight someone else while my Arty's finish it off. No leg it can't move at least enough to make my pounding it unlikely to be effective.

You can focus then on another threat that is one and leave the poor downed mech alone.

That would work once your a few hexes off and I can get a tight targeting on one area and our friendlies are clear.  ;D

Offline JinZah

Re: Battletech
« Reply #197 on: March 25, 2010, 09:26:19 PM »
when it comes to artillery Arrow IV + Tag = win. found that out the hard way once, had a lance a Catapults with Arrow IV 3 map boards away and 2 fast choppers with tag turn a clan assault star into dog meat in quick order.

Offline Anathanasia

Re: Battletech
« Reply #198 on: March 25, 2010, 09:50:48 PM »
when it comes to artillery Arrow IV + Tag = win. found that out the hard way once, had a lance a Catapults with Arrow IV 3 map boards away and 2 fast choppers with tag turn a clan assault star into dog meat in quick order.

This is what I was talking about when I brought up my old Arrow IV equipped hovercraft. Same kind of idea, though I think it's mainly a waste of a mech chassis (because they are so sturdy) to mount artillery on it, but the principle is the same!

As for the rest of the artillery comparisons, we should perhaps settle on how we intend to play it, along the spirit of the Battletech rules where it's really not all that dangerous to mechs really (five point damage groups, not big single hits), or more realistic where artillery is devastating. It's certainly not bad in the former, it's just far more effective against structures and infantry, because those have only one 'face' to take damage on. It'd be nice to know where we stand on this.

Offline RubySlippers

Re: Battletech
« Reply #199 on: March 25, 2010, 10:03:02 PM »
A downed mech would ne a good target like I pointed out but I have no qualms blasting infantry, buildings or armored vehicles. Or best wait for them to stop and unload the infantry and then blast them in the open.  ;D