| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
 Posted: 17-Jan-2007 11:28 Post subject: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
  |
|
How many of you feel that the minimum on the IS LRMs is something that should have gone away or at the least been cut down to three hexes given all of the increase in weapons technology that has happen since 3050?
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
CO_17thRecon
Kell Hounds
Major
Joined: 10-Sep-2002 00:00
Posts: 1297
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 17-Jan-2007 11:39 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
I actually feel the reverse...the Clan LRMs ought to have a minimum range or some other limiting factor. They already weigh HALF as much, so I think the lack of minimum range is pushing it.
_________________
Jarylan Blackwell
"What the...?! Where did you get THAT?!"
"Creative aquisition."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sleeping Dragon
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 06-Apr-2005 00:00
Posts: 4820
Location: Czech Republic
|
| Posted: 17-Jan-2007 12:21 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
Well, since the clans would probably refuse to stop hot-loading their missiles, the IS woud do it too, but something else must happen then, because it pushes ACs out of the game even more.
_________________
The dragon NEVER sleeps!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Karagin
Imperial Karagin Army
Imperial General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 17-Jan-2007 13:54 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
How does it push ACs out of the game?
_________________
Karagin
Only the dead have seen the end of war. - Plato
"Wasted trip Man. Nobody said nuthin' about lockin' horns with no tigers." Oddball
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sleeping Dragon
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 06-Apr-2005 00:00
Posts: 4820
Location: Czech Republic
|
| Posted: 17-Jan-2007 14:33 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
Without min range the AC would have more concentrated damage and lower heat, but for the same weight they would be no match for the missiles.
LRM-5 with two tons of ammo would outperform AC/2 in most situations and it would be the same with AC/5 and LRM-10. Bigger ACs don't have the range (with the exception of gauss rifle) to compete with bigger LRMs, and they are heavier. With DHSs the heat isn't that big problem, so I think that missiles would be preferred.
_________________
The dragon NEVER sleeps!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
CO_17thRecon
Kell Hounds
Major
Joined: 10-Sep-2002 00:00
Posts: 1297
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 17-Jan-2007 15:13 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
True, but why not give the Clans some sort of problem with ammo explosions then on a bad roll? Given their built in CASE in all locations this is a minor problem, but even still it would help. And it would make sense, since their missiles are always armed.
_________________
Jarylan Blackwell
"What the...?! Where did you get THAT?!"
"Creative aquisition."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
mud
Draconis Combine
Tai-sho
Joined: 23-Jul-2002 00:00
Posts: 1618
|
| Posted: 17-Jan-2007 15:18 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
the best solution is simply to impose the 6 hex minimum range restriction on the clans...
_________________
"The enemy's gate is down."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
AWAD
Draconis Combine
Chu-sa
Joined: 06-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 766
|
| Posted: 17-Jan-2007 18:01 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-01-17 11:28, Karagin wrote:
How many of you feel that the minimum on the IS LRMs is something that should have gone away or at the least been cut down to three hexes given all of the increase in weapons technology that has happen since 3050?
|
|
Good question. Min is OK, it is the max that is the problem. If LRMS had a range of 30, then they would be the true long range weapon.
AMS would mean a little more. Indirect fire would really cause issues. Gausszilla would not be able to respond as long range sniper, actually have to move.
So a missle Mech would be more viable. Beyond that mechs that carry a LRM10 for long range actually can use it for 3-5 rounds before the ranges closes in with short weapons.
One thing I did was from the old Tatcial Hanbook. There was a crappy ELRM laucher. In my system you use the same range bands, but it is special ammo. You carry half the load. So LRM5- 12 shots, LRM 10- 6 shots, etc.
Extended range is really easy to explain with lighter metals, and new chemistry and electronics.
AWAD- Gauss should not be the longest range weapon
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Stinger
The Knights of Chaos
General
Joined: 30-Apr-2002 00:00
Posts: 1833
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 17-Jan-2007 21:49 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
Wow Awad hit the real problem. I dont mind the minimum and at this late in the game trying to impose the minimum on clan stuff is just not going to fly. But I think giving them special ammo that works with normal launchers that increases the ranged out to I would say 35 mabey even 40 for IS LRMS. that should help balance them a bit better with the clan stuff since it has no minimum give the IS the longrange advantage.
_________________
Stinger
If it's "creepy" to use the Internet, military satellites, and robot aircraft to find a house full of gorgeous young models so I can drop in on them unexpected, then FINE, I'm "creepy". Howard Wolowitz. BBT.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
tom kazansky
Federated Suns
Private, First Class
Joined: 11-Jan-2007 00:00
Posts: 39
|
| Posted: 18-Jan-2007 00:27 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
I agree. It adds to the realism of LRMs being indirect missles. I don't mind it.
By the way I wrote a nice rebutal to your review of the Madcat Mk II, Mr. Stinger
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sleeping Dragon
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 06-Apr-2005 00:00
Posts: 4820
Location: Czech Republic
|
| Posted: 18-Jan-2007 02:53 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-01-17 18:01, AWAD wrote:
...
Good question. Min is OK, it is the max that is the problem. If LRMS had a range of 30, then they would be the true long range weapon.
AMS would mean a little more. Indirect fire would really cause issues. Gausszilla would not be able to respond as long range sniper, actually have to move.
So a missle Mech would be more viable. Beyond that mechs that carry a LRM10 for long range actually can use it for 3-5 rounds before the ranges closes in with short weapons.
One thing I did was from the old Tatcial Hanbook. There was a crappy ELRM laucher. In my system you use the same range bands, but it is special ammo. You carry half the load. So LRM5- 12 shots, LRM 10- 6 shots, etc.
Extended range is really easy to explain with lighter metals, and new chemistry and electronics.
AWAD- Gauss should not be the longest range weapon
|
|
I'm not that sure about that. The Battletech basic box comes with two maps only, so the range was probably made for balance. You need to place your fire support units carefully to keep them in range and out of combat, but with longer range you would be able to stand and shoot...
Of course, there are weapons that out-ranged them in 3025, but those were probably meant to be fired every round to harass the enemy without doing too much damage (low caliber ACs). The problem starts when ER PPCs and GRs appear. These weapons can do a lot of damage at range, but the limiting factor should be the terrain. The game probably outgrew the designers expectations (literally).
I must agree with you that GR range would be a little shorter, but then the same must apply to ER PPC, clan LPL and ER LL, and probably HAGs (I don't know if there is some other balancing factor, but in tables they look quite powerful). ATM ER ammo would also need an upgrade in range to keep up with this.
_________________
The dragon NEVER sleeps!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
AWAD
Draconis Combine
Chu-sa
Joined: 06-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 766
|
| Posted: 18-Jan-2007 16:54 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-01-18 02:53, Sleeping Dragon wrote:
. The Battletech basic box comes with two maps only, so the range was probably made for balance.
Of course, there are weapons that out-ranged them in 3025, but those were probably meant to be fired every round to harass the enemy without doing too much damage (low caliber ACs). The problem starts when ER PPCs and GRs appear. These weapons can do a lot of damage at range, but the limiting factor should be the terrain. The game probably outgrew the designers expectations (literally).
I must agree with you that GR range would be a little shorter, but then the same must apply to ER PPC, clan LPL and ER LL, and probably HAGs (I don't know if there is some other balancing factor, but in tables they look quite powerful). ATM ER ammo would also need an upgrade in range to keep up with this.
|
|
Range 30 with a min range of 9 would be tough. Yes in the two map first box set you from the backline would be 6 hexes short of the next back line. But terrain is an issue. Also that long min range makes it really important on placement. Fact mechs get in quick.
AC2 had 3 more hexes that LRM. Nothing really, just like LRM over PPC, not enough to make it a different weapon. Remember the average of an LRM20 is 12 points, in groups of 12. So not really devestating. At 10 tons (9 tons laucher+1 ton ammo) you do not hit that hard. And run out after 6 rounds. So even with super long range, target numbers would be critical.
Issuse is if you reduce ERLL and Gauss, then ERML and others would have to be reduced, to balace the range. Easier to make 2 special ammo types. Do not use ATM but many people complain, so maybe keeping the current range would balance it.
AWAD- Incoming harrasing fire
|
|
| Back to top |
|
mud
Draconis Combine
Tai-sho
Joined: 23-Jul-2002 00:00
Posts: 1618
|
| Posted: 19-Jan-2007 22:04 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
nah...I'm not for munching up the LRMs...slap a minimum range on the clans, and not for in-universe reasons but for game balance reasons, and be done with it.
_________________
"The enemy's gate is down."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Stinger
The Knights of Chaos
General
Joined: 30-Apr-2002 00:00
Posts: 1833
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 20-Jan-2007 01:22 Post subject: RE: LRMs in use by the Inner Sphere |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-01-19 22:04, mud wrote:
nah...I'm not for munching up the LRMs...slap a minimum range on the clans, and not for in-universe reasons but for game balance reasons, and be done with it.
|
|
Problem is that wont really change the usefulness (or lack thereof) of them. It should be looked at honestely, and revamped to make them what they should be a useful indirect fire item. Increasing thier range for the IS even by only 9 hexes will give them a slight advantage over thier clan counterparts, and since its been 17 years and they cant cheaply replicate the clan equipment to put them on equal footing weight and damage wise a logical direction would be for a improved range on similar weapons and LRM's would be a logical choice.
Though what it really does is increase game time which people dont want.
_________________
Stinger
If it's "creepy" to use the Internet, military satellites, and robot aircraft to find a house full of gorgeous young models so I can drop in on them unexpected, then FINE, I'm "creepy". Howard Wolowitz. BBT.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Storm
Draconis Combine
Chu-i
Joined: 06-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 278
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 20-Jan-2007 17:46 Post subject: Nah. |
|
|
With all the variants out there, I think the minimum is a great balance.
Storm
_________________
Storm  "The More that thou sweatest and swearest in training, the less thou bleedest and diest in combat."--Dick Marcinko
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
