Wednesday, 04 April 2012

Wednesday, 23 November 2011

  • History of BattleTech

    Hey all!

    Rather than continue to argue about how the official "eras" and rules levels are unhelpful and confusing (thankfully their new pages are a huge improvement over the old ones), 6-8 weeks ago I decided that lapsed/returning players would benefit from a more intuitive illustration of how things have progressed.

    It shows how major products match up against each other, against the BattleTech timeline, and against real world events (video games, change of ownership, etc) -- designed so that someone who's been out of the loop can see where what they own stands in relation to the newest stuff. I don't list the exact equipment changes between each group, but even so, I think it'll be helpful for brand new players as well.

    Check it out!

    My next post will be either the next entry in TLLPoBT (ProtoMechs) or, if I get a new blog set up before Christmas, my amateur approach to TRO editing. 

    Until then, Happy Holidays!

Friday, 14 October 2011

  • Future of the Blog

    I'm going to migrate out of xanga and onto some other host. Not right away though; I'll finish out the "Ten Least Liked Pieces of BattleTech Technology" series here first, however long that takes (more than ten entries, lemme tell ya).

    I want to revisit a few of the old posts, since a bunch were "gosh, I'll do this later" or "wish I could do this," but that can probably wait until after the migration.

    I've been giving Steve's TR:3063 a once-over this past year, and since him and Sounguru are nearing completion on that, I'll explain some of the tools & resources & guidelines I used, plus my personal taste in how a typical TRO shakes out.

    Last October I came up with a thing I want to try on the BTUniverse forums. I didn't want to start it up while also doing stuff for Steve (nevermind other, non-BattleTech priorities/distractions), but hopefully I'm free enough now to try it.

    There's a guy asking me how the product line works, so I'm going to do up a short thing aimed at new/returning players. Might try seeing if Sarna wants such an article, but a guide to the classic battletech *forums* might be of more immediate use.

    I browse & post to the forums to procrastinate on more important activities; I've been on less lately though, and (for the most part) bookmarking threads or links to read later. So I've got fifty or so of those still to peel through (not to mention late replies to the blogs I actually follow regularly).

    With the forum crash this past winter, many of my archive links no longer work, and all my bookmarks from past iterations of the forumarchive are probably broken too. So I might survey my BT bookmarks to see what's still useful and what's gone. Oh, speaking of: I figured out why my page hits spiked with so much traffic from eastern Europe last year -- the official Polish forums linked me! That's pretty cool, and their linki page seems fairly useful.

    There's a surprising number of blogs out there devoted to house-ruling one or another edition of the MechWarrior RPG rules. I'll probably review those when I get around to dissecting & comparing MechWarrior character creation systems. (Nothing to do with BattleTech, but I'm probably going to screw around with World of Darkness character creation rather sooner.)

    I took notes for turning Firefly + Serenity into a BT campaign, but that was before I realized how much of the remaining plot got dumped into Dollhouse. So I've got another show to rewatch before I can tackle that project.

    I want to write up a "Moon Boots" scenario for BattleTech, don't know when I'll get around to it.

    I don't really want to finish reading Tactical Operations, but I'm not going to buy any new (or old, for that matter) BT books until I do, so... I dunno. Tough choice. War of Reaving *almost* tempts me enough to start up again.

    I'd like to start compiling info about what differences exist between different printings of a single book, but I don't think I've got enough leads to follow. Simpler, but longer, would be charting how fast new 'Mech/unit variants got published.

Sunday, 11 September 2011

  • TR3075:

    I approve! Its high points reach par.

    I finally had a chance to glance through a copy of Technical Readout: 3075. I like the art. The writing "RetroTech" 'Mech fluff is basically good, reasonably polished and, yes, even has a bit of fluff-tech. Got a couple whole bunch of groans out of me but no headdesks. As a special treat for my particular tastes, the BattleMech corporate shenanigans (those I noticed) were actually appropriate to the context.

    Not in my top three five TROs, overall, but still worth owning. My thanks to everyone who tried to tell me so on the forums last year.

Wednesday, 20 July 2011

  • Chance of 2d6 Rolling Anything, Visualized as a Bullseye

    I had started reading this old thread, because it discusses the relative impact of TN modifiers, but the guy opens by complaining that it doesn't make sense for a TN modifier to have a different effect at different TNs.  Other days I'd let that lie, but today the remark jumped out at me, and I wanted to see what the differences between Target Numbers physically look like.  A bullseye-target seemed like the most intuitive way to find out:

    Photobucket

    Strange to think that the thin strip around the edge has the same surface area as the bullseye. The widths are really consistant (within 1-2%) from 7 to 11. I suspect that's true for all 2dX, starting at X+1 and continuing until just before their bullseye. 2-5 looks more like what you get on 1dX - each stripe steadily increases as you approach the middle. (3d6 peaks around 13, surprising me.  Don't know what 4d6 does.)

    Photobucket

    Had some trouble drawing circles (think it's time to change mouse pads), hence the switch to color-filled spreadsheet squares. It'd be interesting to find which die curve is the best at matching real-world marksmanship data with the shooters' corresponding measures of training & experience.  Hand-to-hand skills might be tougher to quantify, whereas the problem with technical feats (repair or engineering) may be getting past corporate NDAs. 

    And even if you do find everything, I guess the more important question is still "which stripes do you want the game to be spending most of its time on?"

Saturday, 16 July 2011

  • Star Trek (assorted thoughts)

    I have a rough idea that I think I can make work for a gang of Star Trek, BattleTech or Transformers characters. It's more essential for Transformers than the others, since "all players lose their characters to gain a collective Super Character" doesn't work as well in play as it did in the TV show. Present challenges include hewing more closely to past mech/merc unit generation rules, making character generation less like sudoku, and getting around to looking for a good squad combat mechanic.

    I occasionally see claims that BattleTech has greater depth or richness of culture than Star Trek or other sci fi franchises. Each might devote a different number of paragraphs to each % of civilization, and you could argue how much wiggle room each leaves the players to put their own spin on things, but I can't imagine sci fi adventure gaming actually works differently between franchises ("As Forrest Brown (head designer for their Star Trek game AND Battletech at one time) put it, 'Guns sell. Big guns sell more.' "-Old Geezer, RPGnet).

    The technology is certainly different - it should be, since BattleTech basically forbids anything that's strongly associated with star trek and star wars. We're apparently cool with borrowing less obvious stuff: laser pistols, communicators, and Caspars, plus maybe a vibro lockpick standing in for Dr Who's sonic screwdriver. (Finding every such thing is another one for the Impossible Projects, methinks.)

    I don't see a whole lot more room for Star Trek to progress technologically. Any La Forge or O'Brien can now modify your run-of-the-mill transporter to: alter your age; store a full copy of you in the buffer; reproduce you as a hologram; multiply you; reintegrate doubles; integrate wholly different entities; enter parallel realities; and travel through time.  Every crewman becomes both immortal and expendable, can change their appearance and capabilities at will, and receives instant advice from their own near and distant futures. How do you make travel across a three-dimensional causality-scape as ubiquitous and comprehensible as jetting from one star to another? I can see it becoming a never-ending Twilight Zone, or a variation on Super Rippers, but it's not Star Trek anymore. Or does Roddenberry take us so far into the future that the Federation has collapsed and crumbled to dust, which brings us to what, Andromeda?

    In my last Star Trek post (which I now realize is probably complementary to this post), I identified some Successor States with their Star Trek counterparts. I suppose the next logical step is to identify these gestalt nations with their Babylon 5 counterparts. Haven't seen B5 recently enough for that, though I did finally finish Star Trek. Hence my interest in VanVelding's Dream Crew & Redemption Crew, Yarrokira, Shatnerian videos, and I can't really blame the Germans for confusing the Navy SEALs with the Maqui. If I were special forces in the real world, I'd paint fictional logos on my stuff too (no, I don't think the SEALs actually did that).

    Starting two or three years ago, I began with Star Trek: The Original Series and, at something like an episode a day, watched all of Star Trek, including the movies, The Animated Series, and even Futurama's original run (though I didn't rewatch Galaxy Quest). Watching it all in a steady row, I got to see how deeply self-referential the franchise is, how the shows build off each other and repeat ideas from prior series. Presumably each cadre of writers either wanted to fix "mistakes" in the previous serial or just try their own spin on a theme.

    So given all that, and despite how it ended, I have to say that Enterprise was my favorite Star Trek show. It examines the varying premises and casts of the previous series, taking what is best (yeah, hang on) about Star Trek and distilling it into a very compact form. And if you watch carefully, the show then walks through the major events of each series: first season is TOS, exploration and contact; second is TNG diplomacy; third is DS9 metaplot; fourth is Voyager metaplot; they've got "Captain escapes from Klingon prison" (whichever Kirk movie that was), they've got the "Captain on Trial" episode, and so on! All woven together!

    (Other Star Trek series have their high points, for sure. But if all you've seen is Enterprise, Futurama, and Shatner's episode on The Twilight Zone, you're not doin' too bad.)

    For the most part, whatever faults the show has are self-aware callbacks to the faults of previous series. Not the best choice, from a pure story-telling and audience-grabbing perspective, but it does make Enterprise a kind of crib notes for Star Trek story and theme. (It bears mentioning that, since the metaplot villains are [spoiler :P] time travelers, Enterprise's continuity differs somewhat from that of the other shows.) A friend of mine was hoping they'd just finish the run with more Terran Empire/goatee universe episodes. The actual ending, which crammed a would-be-fifth season into a clip show holodeck episode narrated by (visibly wrongly aged) mid-TNG-era Riker and Troi, did suck of course.

    I guess the lesson here, if there is one, is that you shouldn't write Star Trek about Star Trek.

    ...also, don't use cheesy poprock for your intro music. Even if you are trying to make the space program seem contemporary and relevant and inevitable. And especially don't replace all the track's deep tones with slow symphonic music - it just makes the poprock sound all the more absurd.

Wednesday, 06 July 2011

  • One-Shot missile packs (TLLPoBT part 3)

    TR2750, page 8 (1989)
    ONE-SHOT MISSILE PACKS
    It is possible for a vehicle or 'Mech to be equipped with a single-shot version of the standard missile launcher.  Such a missile system is designated by an "OS" after the missile nomenclature.

    Game Use
    Single shot launchers weigh half a ton more than standard missile-launchers, but the launcher incorporates a single shot or volley of missiles into that weight.  The player does not need to purchase any other ammunition for the launcher.  The launcher can be fired only once in a game.

    Single-shot launchers were voted the #1 most hated piece of BattleTech technology.  They're dinosaurs, relics from the age of 500kg pintle mounts and 5-ton jeeps, used all of six (!) times since their introduction - I doubt most participants would've even remembered them if not for recent discussion or seeing other voters' ballots.  So I have to believe that their spot at #1 doesn't represent hate as much as amazement that Catalyst didn't bring them into line with the rest of the relaunch.

    Paint-it-Pink: "One-Shot Launchers (SRM, MRM, LRM) rules are a complete waste of time, so again not cool. My reading of the rocket launcher rules suggests that the fix is in, but the will to remove useless stuff is lacking. I can see from an RPG perspective that one-shot launchers may offer more in-character role-play opportunities, but for BattleTech the boardgame, not so much."

    Centurion13: "No arguments here. I would expect such devices on vehicles, but not on a ‘Mech. Other than a drastic reduction in weight (and I don’t really see that), the only advantage would be to allow the use of special ammunition. And who wants a launcher that can only plant a single minefield?"

    I figure they were originally meant more for scenario vehicles than for player or campaign vehicles.  In 1989 it wasn't worth FASA's time to create a whole new detailed ruleset for very small weapons (probably figured individual GMs could handle that).  But nowadays, Rocket Launchers are close to the weight of BattleArmor missile tubes, which means we should nearly have a detailed ruleset for putting such small single-shot weapons on BattleMechs. 

    Or, we could leave the construction stats alone, and fiddle with other aspects.  It's been said that BattleTech doesn't have any real surface-to-air or air-to-surface weaponry, and the ability to make such an attack at low atmosphere ranges (.5km hex ranges instead of waiting to get within 30m hex ranges) might be worth a few extra tons. 

    Another option is to increase damage.  Doubling or quadrupling would bring them in line with Rocket Launchers, though 10x would be closer to what the regular reloadable models throw... a fivefold increase (5-point missiles for OS-LRMs and 10-point missiles for OS-SRMs) feels like a good comprise.  Make each tube occupy its own vehicle slot so you don't have to worry about the ol' 60-ton missile carrier loosing hundreds of damage in a single turn. 

    Unbound has a "thunderbolt" missile (precursor to the Tactical Handbook, Maximum Tech, and Tactical Operations weapon of the same name).  For 1 ton and 1 crit it was a one-shot weapon with the same stats as an AC/10, but you were limited to one per shoulder.  (I'm going from memory, so those stats might be a little off.  I would give the full text but I haven't got S7, Unbound, or The Reaches.)



    And now, for the sake of making this post WAY longer than it needs to be, here's everything I can find on one-shot missile packs:



    TR2750, page 96 (1989)
    LIGHTNING
    The Lightning's design gives it a limited but important combat role.  Carrying only light armor and weaponry, the Lightning is not well-equipped to engage in protracted fire-fight.  The craft's agility and advanced fire-control system allow it to close at high speed, maneuver to a position of advantage, and fire its small but accurate array of short-range weapnry.
       In this way, the Lightning can harass enemy forces, especially slow 'Mechs and vehicles.  Commanders often organize teams of Lightnings into strike forces, employing them in the initial phases to break up enemy formations and to cause general confusion.
       When used for other missions the Lightning has many drawbacks.  Not well-equipped to perform reconnaissance and too poorly armed and armored for more traditional combat, the Lightning can become a liability when its particular uses are unnecessary. 

    Hah, 1989 design philosophy: they didn't design the Lightning as a 35-ton hovertank with whatever weapons would fit on a 35-ton tank, they designed it as the kind of vehicle that you'd expect to carry one-shot missile racks (and the OS weight helps to keep it that way).  This is the debut of OS-missiles, so it makes sense that they'd want an exemplar vehicle. 

    (It's also the only vehicle in the book to mount Pulse lasers which could be why it, like the Sentinel, has a second targeting system.)


    BattleTech Compendium, page 121 (1990):
    SINGLE-SHOT MISSILE LAUNCHERS
    The single-shot missile launcher can use special munitions, such as Swarm or Thunder LRM rounds, and special targeting devices (Streak, Narc, or Artemis), at double the base cost of the launcher.  All other performance characteristics are the same as for multi-shot launchers of the same type and ordnance.

    Slightly reworded name and description (I cut out the redundant bits, which I'll continue to do).  Special munitions now apply their ammo cost multiplier (which happens to be "x2" for all of them so far) to the C-Bill cost of a OS launcher, which the chart on page 129 pegs at half of an equivalent multi-shot launcher.  So adding a single shot of expensive ammo to a OS LRM-10, 15, 20, or SRM-4 or 6 costs more than adding a full ton of the same ammo to a regular launcher.  Yippee?  At least Inferno two-packs (inferno ammo costs half as much as regular ammo) become dirt cheap!

    This writeup also omits the part about OS launchers massing an extra half-ton, but considering that no other book ever picked up on that (I'm not counting the War Dog) and the rule isn't marked as significantly changed, I suspect the omission was accidental. 


    TR3050, page 148 (1990):
    QUICKDRAW
    What has created a furor is the substitution of a Hovertec Short Range Missile Detachable Quad for the old model mounted in the center torso.  This one-shot weapon is normally used only on helicopters, hovercraft, and other vehicles designed to make a single offensive pass and then flee. The lack of reloads for the Detachable Quad seems too large a drawback to offset the safety gained by removing the ammo bins from the Quickdraw's center torso.

    I can't decide if the SRM-4 (OS) is there because they wanted to use every kind of weapon once or if they simply wanted the Quickdraw to have a flawed upgrade.  The fact Technicron Manufacturing removed the SRM ammo entirely suggests that they were unable(!) to fit it in a side torso.  Cool that the missile pack is detachable - I wonder if that was inspired by Elementals' missiles?

    "ENGINEERS TESTS" includes a sentence on page 217-218 about OS launchers weighing an extra half ton, but the rule is otherwise identical to what's in the Compendium. 


    Comstar SB, page 100 (1992):
    RAIJIN
    The Raijin mounts a one-shot Holly SRM pack in its center torso. Concealed from IR scanning by heavy insulation, this SRM rack is revealed by activating a swing-open mechanism, allowing MechWarriors to use this hidden weapon at close ranges to devastating effect.

    More than a little surprised to see a one-shot weapon on a 'Mech where everything else is high-tech, though I suppose you could play off some of the OS' tonnage as IR shielding and other concealments.  TR3058's writeup goes on to say that "Recent models of the Raijin come equipped with a standard SRM-6 rack for more staying power."

    Speaking of OS weapons and TR3058, the Peregrine Attack VTOL (and VTOLs in general) might reach more realistic weights and speeds if they were rebuilt with BattleSuit-esque weapons and armor. 


    TR3055, page 74 (1992):
    WAR DOG
    The War Dog carries a last-ditch weapons system in the two SRM Streak one-shot missile packs mounted on the upper legs of the 'Mech.

    Ibid, page 97:
    GRAND TITAN
    As a last-resort weapon, the Titan also mounts two Holly Streak SRM packs, one-shot firing tubes mounted on the upper shoulders of the Titan near the "neck." Pilots often use these tubes for pointblank firing.

    The Kraken variants don't mention a OS launcher, but RS:3055 does, so I assume the record sheets added it as filler. 

    My book's War Dog assigns 9 more armor points than it has (violating torso and arm limits), adds up to 70 tons instead of 75, and depicts its Streak-2s (1.5 instead of 2 tons each) on the lower instead of upper legs.  "Leg mounted" usually means "hips" since legs move too much for aiming, but I suppose that calf-high works if you need to aim into places where infantry go, or if you really want to launch torpedoes in depth-0 water.  And you're not likely to line that shot up more than once anyhow. 

    My book's Grand Titan adds up to 100 tons (engine is misstated as 26.5 instead of 26.25 tons).  The Streak-2s don't show up in the stat block, though one is drawn on the outside of each arm and two are shown in the 'Mech's "forehead" instead of its neck.  It'd probably be easiest to implement BattleSuit-scale OS weapons on a 'Mech like this that doesn't actually devote tonnage to them in the first place. 

    I've heard that different printings list different (though still wrong) stats for these and other 'Mechs.  It'd be fun to know just what!


    Maximum Tech, page 90 (1997):
    IMPROVED SINGLE-SHOT MISSILE LAUNCHERS
    A Level 3 single-shot missile system weighs half a ton less than the launcher itself, including a single salvo of ammunition at no additional cost in weight, space or C-bills.  These missile systems follow all other standard rules for single-shot launchers given on p. 120, BTC:RoW.

    The beautiful thing about this rule is, in a time before BattleArmor construction rules, it let you build BattleArmor.  Elemental = small laser (.5 ton) + 10 points clan ferro (.5 ton) + OS SRM-2 (0 tons) = 1 ton; Kanazuchi = medium laser (1 ton) + 15 points armor (~1 ton) + 2x OS SRM-2s (1 ton) = ~3 tons; and so on. 

    But everything that isn't a Clan SRM-2(OS) still weighs too much to put on 'Mechs or whatever else you're supposed to put them on, and Clan SRM-2(OS)s weigh too little to be used responsibly.  Fill all your empty critical slots with free weapons that don't explode! Yay!

    (I don't have BattleTech Compendium: Rules of Warfare, but I assume it uses the same wording as CityTech 2e (1994), whose page 71 rewords the rule from TR3050 and then tacks the half-ton sentence onto the end.)


    BattleTech Master Rules, page 129:
    Single-Shot Missile Launchers
    Any type of missile weapon can be single-shot, including SRMs, MRMs, LRMs, Narc missile beacons and torpedos. 

    Arrow IV (OS), anyone?

    This is a longer version of CityTech 2e's rule, and (though I'm not going to read anything into this) fails to mention special targeting systems (Artemis and Streak).  It then goes on to explain that you multiply the cost of the launcher instead of the cost of the ammo "because ammo is not sold separately" - either the writer wanted to justify why a single shot of ammo costs so much (if so, he missed the point) or he was just rambling. 


    Field Manual Periphery, page 169 (2002):
    ROCKET LAUNCHERS
    At the same time, he directed his scientists to begin developing low-tech weapons that could be both readily mass-produced and easily retrofitted onto a 'Mech or tank.
       The one and only major weapon system to survive initial field tests was one similar in concept to the Draconis Combine's recently developed MRM series of missile launchers.  Instead of combining massive launcher racks with a complicated ammunition-feed system, the Hegemony's designers took a far simpler approach by making these new launchers completely self-contained, firing a single flight of unguided high-explosive rockets that are easily reloadable by hand in the field, making them nearly perfect for the still decidedly low-tech Marian legions.  The main drawback was that the designers could not incorporate guidance packages into the rockets or the launchers without giving up too much space and mass.

    So most of the weight in a BattleMech weapon is the ammo feed and, to a much lesser extent, the guidance and fire control (hey, weapon control helped push the Commando from 20 to 25 tons!).  It makes sense, you've got to draw shells or missiles or powerful electricity a couple meters through the 'Mech's torso, through the shoulder, and several meters back down to the forearm (if the weapon is in the torso with the ammo, then I guess the weight goes instead to aiming and radiation shielding). 

    I guess the real advantage of Rocket Launchers isn't that they're any easier to manufacture than LRMs or SRMs (by however much easier MRMs are), but that once your soldiers have the missiles, they aren't limited by your supply of LRM and SRM launchers. 


    TechManual, page 230 (2007):
    SINGLE-SHOT (OS) MISSILE LAUNCHERS
    Introduced: 2676 (Terran Hegemony)
    Extinct: 2800 (Inner Sphere)
    Recovered: 3030 (Free Worlds League)
       A variation on the LRM, MRM and SRM systems (including Streak launchers, torpedo launchers and even the Narc missile beacon launcher) the single-shot launcher--also known as one-shot or OS--is a curious concept that did not so much go extinct in the Succession Wars as fall into general disuse.  Hardly considered lostech (even the date given for the first introduction is more to pin down when the use of one-shot launchers became common for the SLDF), the single-shot missile launcher design simply modifies a standard missile launch system with a shortened, fixed-mount ammo bin carrying a one-salvo capacity.  Used only when tonnage is at a premium, one-shot launchers offer a little extra punch in a pitched fight, but with an all-or-nothing approach that can be as much a curse as the lack of a bin full of explosive munitions might be a blessing.
       Of course, with the advent of the generally more potent Marian-style Rocket Launchers, the One-Shot missile concept may once more be on its way to extinction.

    Ibid, page 261:
    SINGLE-SHOT (OS) LAUNCHERS
       Excepting rocket launchers--which gain this feature for free--a single-shot variation is available for most battlesuit-mounted missile launcher designs.  Unlike the vehicular variety, which presents a slight mass increase due to the specialized small-scale ammo bin, the battlesuit single-shot system removes a typical missile launcher's ammunition feed mechanisms and bins in favor of individual, pre-chambered and launch-prepared warheads.  This adaptation slightly increases the weapon's bulk, but presents a tonnage savings that makes up for--in some cases, anyway--the loss of battlefield weapon endurance. 

    Back 1989, stats were flexible in what they "really" represented in-universe (remember, 5-ton jeeps and 500kg pintle mounts).  So maybe a OS-toting vehicle "really" massed less than its final tonnage, or the wasted mass represented lower grade manufacturing in the vehicle's other parts, or whatever. 

    In 2007, stats are taken to be accurate and exact depictions of the universe.  TechManual describes the OS system as identical to a regular launcher, full ammo feed and everything, except that the ammo bin is occupied by other more urgent equipment.  Either a) the factory will eventually issue a field kit to restore the ammo bin (I guess I could see the Star League building quick, temporary variants) or b) guys are hacking their machines up in the field (which would get more, not less, common in the Succession Wars). 

    ...Now that I think about it, that factory explanation would actually work for the Raijin, Grand Titan, and War Dog.  Neither works for the Quickdraw or Lightning, though I'm sure the QKD-5M is what they're thinking of with the FWL recovery date.  (TR3050:Upgrades places a Streak SRM-4 (OS) on its Daishi C, but I don't know where the fiction for that variant is.)(And while I'm on TR3050:Upgrades, it looks like, even though FASA discussed and depicted many "side" mounted weapons firing into their vehicles' forward arcs, Catalyst stuck a SRM-4(OS) sideways through the the Lightning's air intakes...)

    Why do BattleSuits get any kind of discount for OS launchers?  Ammo feeds can be measured in inches here, so all the shots would be "launch-prepared," if not "pre-chambered."  Count feed mass with each shot of ammo if you must. 

    PS, General TechManual gripe: note that one section is titled "...missile launcher" and the other "...launcher."  That's how the index lists them, one word difference and no sign which is Mech and which is BA, and meanwhile the equipment tables list both as "One-Shot" instead.


    Tactical Operations, page 327 (2008):
    IMPROVED ONE-SHOT (I-OS) MISSILE LAUNCHERS
    Introduced: 3056 (Draconis Combine), 3058 (Clan Nova Cat)
       One-shot missile launchers were always a quick-fix design, taking existing launchers and sealing off the ammunition feed mechanisms to contain a single, "unchambered" flight of missiles.  Developed after the Clan Invasion in an effort to further streamline these weapons, DCMS engineers discovered how to do away with the ammo feed mechanisms entirely by placing the missiles directly in the launch tubes, a trick the Nova Cats would soon copy. 

    I've got tell ya, I'm pretty sure that ammo feeds -at least on most multi-ton weapons- mass more than half a ton.  Also, "one-shot" missile launchers weren't always a quick-fix design (see: the first OS design ever published), but that type of missile carrier would be seen mostly with planetary militias or infantry, which BattleTech doesn't generally care about.

Tuesday, 31 May 2011

  • Ten Least Liked Pieces of BT Technology (part 2)

    There's no reason given for the poll.  Since Herb didn't distinguish between reasons for disliking any items, I'd guess that he was either seeing how this poll's total response compares to previous polls and overall forum traffic or seeing how the votes match up against sales of the corresponding rulebooks/sourcebooks/TROs.  Especially unpopular items might be reviewed with an eye towards era-specific rules in Interstellar Ops, but I doubt the poll was intended to pick out individual items like that. 

    "Your top ten MOST LIKED pieces of TM/TO/SO technology" would have been an interesting followup poll. 

    Lots of people left slots open or popped in to say they had no opinion (one guy even voted for "polls about what is wrong with BattleTech").  It's funny how many posts had their rationales edited out, and while most of the real votes I understand, there're a few it'd be nice to get explanations for (and I'm awful curious to know if anyone else got edited for following directions too closely).  A couple of items are probably momentary fads- I wonder how different the results would have been if everyone had submitted their responses blind, or had to select from a checklist or from TM/TO/SO's collected tables of contents. 

    This series of posts is, in a lot of ways, me catching up to Paint-it-Pink and Steven Satak who discussed their top tens late last year (with some back and forth).  If anybody else has written on this topic elsewhere, please drop me a link in the comments!

    For my part, I tend to like elegant rules, rules that that resolve several problems at a single stroke.  To effortlessly make things go smoothly.  My least favorite items tend to make things not go smoothly.  Here's how I rated my top ten:

    #1 Lift Hoist, rated 1 (I wish it had never been invented).  Back in Combat Equipment it only affected lifting capacity, which was fine, but under Total Warfare it lets you carry 50% tonnage without penalizing MP.  That's so broken that it obsoletes tractor-trailers.  If it's supposed to compensate for other rules (Cargo Carriers, Handheld weapons, whatever) they'd have been better off fixing those other rules directly. 

    #2 Industrial Mech Environmental Sealing, rated 1 (I wish it had never been invented).  TM/TO/SO tries very hard to prevent the Industrial Tech Base (which exists in all but name) from ever approaching standard Inner Sphere 'Mechs in any way ever.  Requiring extra tonnage for environmental sealing on top of the already steep 20% structure is only one small part of that.  Even support vehicles include environmental sealing in their 20%.  WorkMechs get nothin'. 

    #3 Trailer Hitch, rated 1 (I wish it had never been invented).  It has no business occupying equipment slots on a combat vehicle.  It slows the Mobile Long Tom from 2/3 to 1/2.  It's almost impossible to crit while in use and irrelevant when not.  If somebody wants a tank to pull cargo they'll decide it based on the scenario, not on whether the sheet lists a trailer hitch.  The only thing a hitch DOES is transmit targeting feeds and ammo feeds (and presumably coolant feeds) between the tractor and trailer. 

    So what we'll do is we'll take a CGR-1A1 Charger, remove all five lasers and half a ton of armor, upgrade to double heatsinks, and install both a Lift Hoist and a Trailer Hitch into its left (handless) arm.  Now build a so-called "Handheld Weapon" consisting of a Long Tom, a trailer hitch, two tons of armor and eight tons of ammo.  Hurray!  Our 120-ton, 5/8/0 'Mech is a paragon of the Lift Hoist and Trailer Hitch spirit.

    #4 Collapsible Command Module, rated 2 (I wish the Cyclops HQ variant had never gotten a record sheet).  This comes down to reading incomprehension.  The Cyclops carries a detachable bunker on its upper rear torso - external cargo, depicted as a "backpack" type module right there in the TRO (alongside the 'Mech's full complement of weapons), not counted in the 'Mech's tonnage or critical slots.  But the record sheet mounts it internally?  In place of the autocannon?  And, seemingly for the hell of it, TacOps adds five minutes to how long it takes to detach and set up. 

    #5 ECM "Ghost Targets," rated 5 (you are making this hard for no reason).  Just put a second mini on the table already! 

    #6 Unarmored Infantry, rated 7 (I can live with it, but only because I can accept not playing with infantry ever).  Elementals terrified MechWarriors in 3050 - in TM/TO/SO, Elementals are penny ante next to conventional infantry.  While anti-Mech attacks require special training and Star League rapid-ascent gear (the more you have of one the less you need of the other), infantry can't ever NOT have it, and even fully nude infantry can do it. 

    The troopers of a platoon are spaced so far apart that no two guys are ever actually in range of the same target, yet their primitive backwoods autorifles not only damage 'Mech armor but do it more efficiently than virtually all higher tech options.  And unerrata'd they could get a TN+7 defensive modifier just by standing near a tank!  The most practical way to kill them is (no joke) with light snowfall. 

    #7 Shields, all sizes, rated 8 (this item could stand to be reinvented).  They're not quite external ordinance, not quite internal components, and their rules for play don't really mesh with the rules for how anything else works.  It's all just really awkward. 

    #8 Actuator Enhancement System, rated 10 (I could almost live with this item, but still will not miss it if it is removed from the game).  Gunnery bonuses, piloting bonuses, physical attack bonuses - does it roll the dice for you too?  C'mon.  We do not need another gunnery bonus to stack with all the other gunnery bonuses.  If your TNs are that high then either you're tackling the problem from the wrong end or your game is too gonzo to bother with official gear anyhow. 

    The Tactical Handbook only had the Star League Neurohelmet, and people called that "munchy" because it was, but at least you could ignore it since it wasn't a construction item.  If you want equipment that makes physical attacks easier, sure, we don't have one of those yet, but the AES is still trivially light and needlessly finicky.  If it's too broken to allow in heavy and assault 'Mechs then it's most likely broken for lights and mediums too! 

    All signs have always indicated that BattleMechs are (at least since the dawn of Level 1 technology) capable of finely tuned movement, limited only by the skill of the MechWarrior.  The Clans couldn't manage such an across-the-board improvement in time for their Invasion, and there's no way the Dragoons (AES is Dragoons' tech) can improve on Clan tech unaided, so it almost has to be a piece of newfound lostech; maybe an early step towards unpiloted AutoMechs.  Whatever its origin, I fear that -despite no evidence for this kind of advancement in the first seven centuries of 'Mech warfare- it'll be the basis for Interstellar Ops' era rules. 

    And as a very special bonus, the AES' explanatory text includes an elementary misunderstanding of how EI (Enhanced Imaging) works. 

    #9 Partial Wing, rated 10 (I could almost live with this item, but still will not miss it if it is removed from the game).  It saves weight on single-heatsink machines, is the most efficient "compact" item available to double-heatsink machines, poses the same game imbalance that improved jump jets do but without their drawbacks, is small enough to fully benefit from armor protection while still producing tangible lift (unlike VTOLs, WiGEs, ASFs and LAMs), generates substantial lift at speeds where 'Mechs don't experience substantial lift, and the heat dissipation... Look, due to how 'Mech armor works (both in game mechanics and in universe), heat dissipation is proportional not to surface area but to number of heatsinks.  So you'd have to mount heatsinks outside of the armor to get this extra dissipation. 

    Maybe it was a hack to fit a few MW:DA/oD figures into BT stats, maybe somebody wanted to preserve all the worst parts of the old LAM rules, or maybe anti-gravity technology finally snuck into BattleTech.  Whatever the case, it's a gimmick that should have stayed as descriptive text for units like the Spider or Kage. 

    #10 Null Sig/Chameleon LPS, rated 10 (I could almost live with this item, but still will not miss it if it is removed from the game).  The Chameleon Light Polarization Shield is special enough to get its own rules (coincidentally buffing infantry) but the Phased Array Sensor System and Sheathed Directional Communication Beacon aren't?  "Null signature system" is now the in-universe term for the Exterminator's heat baffles/dissipators, which still generate heat instead of shutting down heatsinks (we can do that now)?  And the combo (clearly scenario/campaign/RPG gear) gets nerfed to glorify the new movement-based Void-Sig system?  It's just a string of questionable decisions, adding complications for the sake of being complicated, made worse when they're invariably defended by misreading TR:2750 and Maximum Tech. 

Sunday, 22 May 2011

  • Ten Least Liked Pieces of BT Technology

    A poll a while back asked for your ten least favorite pieces of TechManual/TacOps/StratOps technology.  Ranked lists are harder to tally than rated lists, so (unless the list was given "in no particular order") I weighted a person's #1 entry at 10x the worth of their #10 entry.  The 150 participants came up with around 373 unique choices that, even with repetition and overlap, cover just about everything I can think of - anything that didn't show up at least once can't possibly be getting enough exposure to the playerbase. 

    Three hundred entries didn't get enough votes to care about, so we're going to set those aside, and rate the remaining seventy-some on a 53-point scale. (Yes, 53 points.  The top twenty  entries got too many votes to make a 10-point scale worthwhile.)  To give you a sense of proportion: medium lasers are in the First Circle; autocannon/2 are in the Tenth Circle; and the single most-hated technology is in the Fifty-Third circle. 

    (To see the top-ranked items, skip down.)

    First Circle of Giant Robot Hell:
    The medium laser just barely edges in the door here.  Beside it are super heavy 'Mechs, tandem-charge warheads, fluid guns, all autocannon, single heatsinks, compact heatsinks, compact cockpits, specialty armors, quad battlesuits, heavy lasers, silver bullet gauss, rifle cannon, aerospace fighters, swarm munitions, standard LRMs, and torso cockpits. 

    Second Circle of Giant Robot Hell:
    Ahead of that lot stand null/camo/sneak systems, streak LRMs, ferro lamellor on 'Mechs, Inner Sphere ER lasers, the vanilla AC/5, MMLs, partial wings, clan MPLs, the Actuator Enhancement System, Blue Shield, clan ER medium lasers, conventional infantry combat, and NARC.

    Third Circle of Giant Robot Hell:
    The last big bundle.  Binary Lasers, artillery, Targeting Computers, triple strength myomer, the new generation (Heavy & Light & Snub) of PPCs, Variable Speed Pulse Lasers, warships, handheld weapons, Magshot/AP Gauss, micro lasers, Manei Domini cyborgs, nukes and other WMDs, clan RACs, and plasma cannon. 

    (Now the competition starts to thin out.)

    Fourth Circle of Giant Robot Hell:
    Cruise Missiles, all machine guns, A/B/M-pods, Capellan stealth armor, standard gauss rifle, and Clan ERPPCs. 

    Fifth Circle of Giant Robot Hell:
    Bombast Laser, RACs, rocket launchers, XXL engines, light gauss rifle, and Inner Sphere ER Large Laser.

    Sixth Circle of Giant Robot Hell:
    ProtoMech art and TW's implementation of the Bear Hunter autocannon.

    Seventh Circle of Giant Robot Hell:
    Double Heatsinks and plasma weapons. 

    Eighth Circle of Giant Robot Hell:
    Ultra autocannon, all varieties of C3, and missile-delivered mine fields.

    Ninth Circle of Giant Robot Hell:
    Mechanical Jump Boosters and hatchets. 


    ...which brings us to the ten (actually eleven, because #11 scored close to #10) pieces of technology least-liked by the BattleTech forum, which will be counted down in bold text. The most hated item, and the second most hated item, are disliked so much more than everything else that Giant Robot Hell skips down a few dozen circles to show you the depth of that distaste.


    (10th circle)
    		-#11- Pulse Lasers
    -#10- all varieties of Autocannon/2
     -#9- Hyper-Assault Gauss Rifles

    (12th circle)

    		 -#8- Medium Range Missile launchers
    (13th circle)
    		 -#7- Tasers
     -#6- Land-Air 'Mechs
     -#5- clan Long Range Missile launchers

    (14th circle)

     -#4- physical weapons that Aren't Hatchets

    (16th circle)
    		 
     -#3- clan Large Pulse Lasers

    (25th circle)
    		 
     -#2- ProtoMechs

    (53rd circle)

      -#1- One-Shot missile launchers     (including Improved OS, but excluding Rocket Launchers)


Thursday, 12 May 2011

  • Apologies for the recent inactivity.  I have been distracted by something online (BT forums? I don't recall), then job hunting, then house/pet sitting, and then traveling.  So I've got a small mountain of email to chew through (including three from three different steves three weeks ago) and a few other things to follow up on, then I can get back to keeping up with all y'all.