/btg/ - BattleTech General

Looks like a Klingon

And bitches about honor just the same amount.

How close are the militaries of the Houses tied to the mercenaries they employ?

Would a mercenary company employed by the FedSuns receive their orders from a Davion commander directly, or through intermediaries?

Usually through a liaison who may be attached (by being part of them) to the standing military, or a regional militia, or even planetary militia. That liaison may even not report to the standing military and may instead report directly to a noble. The liaison may choose to defer to any commander for orders or requirements, handling contract fulfillment and arbitration instead, or they may take full control. It all really depends upon the region and how much of a lackey or power player the liaison and local authoritative powers are.

[about the Katana] Do not think of it as a weapon. Make it part of your hand - part of your arm. Make it part of you.

Depends on the merc unit and its ties.
Also depends on the military. Almost all have their own liaison offices, and will use liaisons to issue orders and whatnot.
Some are more lax, letting the mercs do their own thing to accomplish orders (Davion) while others are more micromanaging (Kurita and maybe Liao).

Well, say you have a small mercenary company who're on a FedSun world that's currently being invaded. It seems like it'd be a bit of a nightmare having all of their orders relayed through different people when time is probably of the essence.

Then the onplanet AFFS commander would probably assume control.

So I recall hearing on /btg/ that a load of Kurita regiments basically disappeared during/after the Clan Invasion.

Like 10-15 or more that were unaccounted for.

So if they had been accounted for, and pulled in for the defense of Luthien in 3052 (and so Hanse not sent the Kell Hounds and Wolf's Dragoons), would they have been able to hold the Drac capital?

Also, say with those seven elite merc regiments not going to Luthien the AFFC instead uses them to strike along the Jade Falcon axis of advance.
How might that influence the Falcon invasion corridor?

I'm curious about these two alternate scenarios.

What do you BT military historians suppose the outcomes would be?

Orders probably wouldn't be relayed through different people - just down the normal chain of command. The local AFFS commander issues his orders, these go down to regiment/battalion level, and depending on where you are in the chain, the orders eventually come to your liaison officer (who will probably be billeted with you, since it's only one more mouth to feed in your assigned base), who relays the orders to you.

Note that this would only apply if you're under an AFFS contract. If you were contracted as, say, security to Baron X of the planet, Johnny Foreigner could invade that planet and the AFFS wouldn't have a say in the matter unless there is a clause in the contract that allows the AFFS to "nationalise" you for the duration of the conflict. Otherwise, you'd be providing security for the Baron's mountain retreat as usual.

The Dracs had enough with what was listed in the 20-Year Update to plop down like 30 Regiments on Luthien without weakening their Clan border or FedCom borders.

I'm not sure where those units go missing but my suspicion is that the wonderfully fact-checked and extremely accurate Objective Raids omitted them and then OR was used as the source for FM: DC.

The Dracs weren't allowed to defend Luthien or rescue Hohiro on their own because of OOC reasons. They had to be inferior to the AFFC, they had to rely on the AFFC for help, and the AFFC helping the Dracs was the only way to grow rapport because that's what the writers wanted at the time.

As for the Falcon front, hard to see it making a difference even with the Dragoons there. It's not like they did a fantastically great job outside of Luthien against the Clans and the Falcons were considerably more beloved by the writers than the Jags or Cats.

Poor nova cats

Cats had it coming, but I still miss when they were a power. At least we still have the Spirit Cats.

Stop lying user

>Cats had it coming

They really never got anything other than thrown under the bus

So, I keep wanting to look into this game, and bouncing off the fairly large rule set.

So, some questions before I look deeper:
Are tanks actually well implemented in this system?
Are they worth using?

What does he gain from doing so anonymously?

Improbable, yes, impossible no.

Besides, doesn't Battletech give you all the warmth and love you crave?

>well-implemented
Hard to say, because it depends on what you want out of them

>worth using
If you use vee effectiveness alternate rules, then yes.

I suppose. In truth my dislike of them stems from that awful Northwind Highlander book/plotline with Loren Sueman, so really I suppose I should just hate the Northwinders.

>Are tanks actually well implemented in this system?
They work? They're pretty fragile compared to mechs due to the vehicle crit system but they have functional rules that aren't complicated once you learn their few special things (they handle elevation worse than mechs, they have vehicle crits, they have different arcs than mechs, that's about it).

>Are they worth using?
This is really variable. It's like asking "are mechs good?" Well, some of them are? There are tank equivalents of the Clint and of the Awesome, so YMMV. Super generally, they're worse than an equal tonnage of mechs would be. That being said, some tanks are more than capable of holding their own against mechs and vehicles have a few advantages (only one level high means they're easy to hide, they can carry infantry/BA, cheaper in cbills and BV).

>Are tanks actually well implemented in this system?

They are, in that there's a wide variety of them and they can usually hold their own on the battlefield.

>Are they worth using?

Absolutely. Tanks are strictly weaker than Mechs on equivalent tonnages (ie, a 35 ton tank will almost always die to a 35 ton Mech), but that's a deliberate choice made by the game designers. Tanks, therefore, receive a Battle Value discount - a 35 ton Striker tank only costs 564 BV, while a 35 ton Wolfhound Mech costs 1,061 - so in the long run, they're balanced with each other.

There are several optional rules which make tanks much more durable and remove tank-specific critical hits...but if you use those you will make tanks strictly better than Mechs. Tanks can mount MUCH more armor and weapons than a Mech, in exchange for not being able to go across less terrain types and being vulnerable to critical hits, so if you take away those critical hits the vees will often be better that the Mechs. If you make tanks outright better than Mechs, why bother with a game about giant robots in the first place?

>If you make tanks outright better than Mechs, why bother with a game about giant robots in the first place?

The worst thing about Battletech are the Mechs anyway, so I fail to see the problem with obsoleting Mechs off of the battlefield. They're completely unrealistic and they should be more vulnerable than tanks to incoming fire, not less. CGL completely fucked up in the way vehicles were handled.

I was mostly wondering if tanks were still in the game as a flavor thing, or if they were actually viable. The fluff seemed to be built around masturbating how great mechs are, so I was wondering if tanks existed just to show how great mechs are.

though, this leads to another question. Is there any way in which infantry help? Are they worth using on any level?

Tanks are definitely viable. Though, they are generally worse than mechs, so keep that in mind. It *is* a wargame about giant stompy robots.

Infantry are a highly contentious and divisive topic around here recently. The short answer is: they can be relevant, yes. The long answer requires more whiskey than I have to explain.

Infantry can be okay.

>unrealistic

Infantry vary from "basically mobile minefields" to "comparable in firepower and range to an Awesome"

Most of the time vehicles work better as carriers for one or two big guns or as cheap canon fodder, compared to mechs serving as general pupose war machines. Infantry can go all over the place depending on rules and such.

>off by one
Ouch. Have pic related in response.

What happened there?

>Infantryman.
>woman soldier
>17 Mech kills

Maximum Sue/10

She just used a mech-scale PPC to shoot an infantry platoon, "killing" 17 of them. That's not Sue at all.

Cassie Suthorn :)

Is there any way to have multiple techs work on a refit to shorten it in MekHQ?

...that's not a good counterargument, user

>vehicles being mishandled
>CGL's fault
You have to be 18 to post here, kid.

Then why are you playing BT, you autist?

25 Jenners versus 8 Atlases, who wins?

Assuming 3025 variants, probably the jenners. They'd have higher to-hit numbers and VASTLY outnumber the Atlases. They just have so many rolls available compared to the Atlases, they'd probably grind them down over time.

Jenners, I'd say. Most many lights VS few assault fights go to the lights

Let me give you an idea what can happen. A similar situation was mentioned in the fluff of having a trio of Locusts surrounding a larger mech giving you problem, but I had a team of three Stingers that would hunt medium mechs and consistently bring them down. The most notable was a Centurion that was just savaged by the little runts.
Swarm tactics in some ways can be really unpleasant.

>Specifically a mech game
>Complains that mechs are viable in a mech game
>Stop liking what I don't like

So I'm getting a bunch of BA to use as boarders for anti-DropShip activity. What primary weapon should I give them? Considering either a small laser (for ammo management and general effectiveness) or a flamer (for the terror aspect). Going to be using IS Standard for the main troops.

Stop biting the bait, you Mormons.

Jenners, definitely. Awesomes or Marauder-IIs would stand a decent chance of winning, but anything with detonatable ammo nearly always looses to swarms

>implying anyone here actually plays
>any pics "proving" otherwise are just ripped from GIS or the OF

>playing Battletech
Good Lord no, can you imagine what a pain that would be?

No, user, all the fun is in the theorycrafting. Battletech is far too much of a hassle to actually play. If I wanted to gaff about for eight hours I'd play cricket.

Speaking of the atlas, anyone have any good variants? None of the canon 3025 or 3050s models really do it for me

Not even the AS8-D? Damn, son, you have problems.

What do you WANT out of the Atlas, then?

>Battletech is far too much of a hassle to actually play.

This. Alpha strike is a godsend, and it's a far superior game. The sooner CGL makes the switch over from BT to AS and retires BT completely, the better off everyone will be.

>What do you WANT out of the Atlas, then?
To defeat 25 Jenners.

...

>Not even the AS8-D?
Jihad era. I was only talking about 3025&50s models

You can't handle the challenge? Fine, I'll ask the thread.

New Mech Challenge: Design an Atlas, any tech level, has to defeat 25 3025 Jenners in a fight (Jenners attack in waves of 4, every two turns).

4/25=6 waves + a singlet?

You'd get swarmed in the first two turns. By the time you manage to kill one Jenner, the others will be fucking your ass raw.

Yes.

Coward. Something's gotta be able to do it.

I have one that could do it in pairs, but alone ain't happening

Fuck it, why not. Let's see this monstrosity.

>Coward. Something's gotta be able to do it.

No, there isn't. The game doesn't work that way, unless you're going to set up hilariously artificial terrain or gravitic conditions that gut the Jenner movement pattern.

In no conditions that aren't ludicrously weighted in favor of the Atlas can the Atlas prevail. ESPECIALLY not a 3025-era Atlas.

which era are we talking about for the atlas, and which for the jenners?

THE Jenner. JR7-D. The little ass-exploding faggot that appears behind you and says "Psh, nothing personnel, kid."

I've got a 3025 atlas that could probably win the original 8-25 challenge easy, but what you're describing ain't happening

I mean, a pair of slightly overweight hellstars that were based on Atlas chassies could probably do it

Era for the Atlas: anything, any tech is allowed.

No, I'm pretty sure that if a Schiltron can delete an ENTIRE BINARY of Turkina-Z's (and one Orca), basically anything is possible in Battletech.

Really? May as well post it, since the original user wanted to see something like that.

It's basically a fat awesome, three PPCs, 4MLs, 29SHS, 19 tons armor. Eight of them standing back-to-back could probably take 25 jenners, depending on pilot quality

>No, I'm pretty sure that if a Schiltron can delete an ENTIRE BINARY of Turkina-Z's (and one Orca), basically anything is possible in Battletech.

False equivalency is extremely false.

Well shit, you could probably cram three cAIVs into a 100 ton chassis with a cXLFE, load nukes, kill them all

I wonder if someone is playing through a scenario of trying to beat back a horde of Jenners right now?

Third Transfer now, gas the frails.

>The worst thing about Battletech are the Mechs anyway, so I fail to see the problem with obsoleting Mechs off of the battlefield
Why are you even playing battletech?

Huh?

Vehicles are worth while both in fluff and combat, but they are worse than 'Mechs in most areas. Infantry are specialized but generally fair as well as you would think 16 guys with M4-Carbines would against a giant robot; but they can be hell in an urban environment.

A fully kitted out customized Atlas with Clan tech might be able to take out the waves of Jenners, assuming fair terrain and decent pilots, he Just has to kill a Jenner a turn, or at least leg it and CLPLs are a hell of a drug. This is also assuming that the Jenner player isn't smart enough to hide until he has enough 'Mechs on table to effectively swarm the Atlas. It honestly comes down to player skill and terrain in my opinion. If the Jenner player is running around on multiple map-sheets and can duck and hide and wait for all his dudes to show up then he'd probably win. If there is only one map-sheets and it's flipped over so it's literally only a bunch of blank hexes then the Atlas could probably win because it could with the right payload drop a Jenner a turn. I think the combat in most cases would favor the Jenners especially if they are played smart, but the Atlas has a chance.

Or you just do what said and mount two Arrow IVs and nuke the Jenners with Davy Crocketts and hope you survive the secondary effects.

Newbie here
How are the quad mechs, is there a decent one? And the Quad-vees?
I'd like to start playing around with artillery units, what's a mostly common artillery vehicle/mech? What about an artillery quad mech?

Quadvees are bad compared to 'Mechs but potentially good compared to vehicles. So it depends on what you're trying to do.

Quads in general are a bit harder to get the most out of than comparable bipeds. They can be a bit tougher with the extra armour and internal structure, and partial cover hides everything but the torsos and head which can be hilarious.

However, the lack of internal space can mean they're slow and often means they can't boat energy weapons as well as bipeds because they can't spare the space for XL engines and DHS. They can't torso twist either so you have to be more aware of what's in front of them and what the enemy is trying to flank with.

Finally, while I don't recall any canon quads with artillery weapons that's easy enough to fix with a custom design.

>Newbie
As the years progressed, more things got added, so it all depends on your tech level.

One, Artillery are outside of tourney rules and are found in Tactical Operations... they were complex enough to merit a place there, I guess. They're not too bad, as far as I'm concerned.

Quads are not too bad, but they shine the most on broken terrain where a normal ground-bound mech would have to zig and zag a lot. Being able to side-shuffle at a cost of 2 mp helps to chop the MP off of turn-move-turn that a biped might need. They're also handy for situations that call for lots of fall checks, like running on concrete or moving through rubble. It comes at the cost of not being able to torso twist, though. Bear that in mind.

As for artillery? I'm not sure about both being on there. The Goliath is one of the two first quads, and it packed two LRM10s, so you could at least use it for indirect LRM fire... but as far as quads with artillery... mechs are usually limited to the Arrow IV since most tube arty chews up crazy amounts of crit-space. Off the top of my head, I don't know any Quads with Arrow IV.

To my knowledge, it wouldn't be possible. I don't think that you can use the legs when splitting criticals, and I think that the Arrow IV uses up more crits than can can be offered on a quad... at least not without using stuff like compact engines and gyros...

Your best shot is to find Quads made with Missiles in mind. Artillery-packing quads... I don't think you can pull it off without making a Superheavy Post-Jihad era mech.

What's the percentage chance of a through armor critical? Is it about 1%?

Looking a little more into it, there's only one way I have found that you could make a Quad artillery unit.

The only two choices that could work in a quad is either using A) A clan version of the Arrow IV artillery (12 crits), or an inner sphere Thumper artillery cannon, not to be mistaken with the thumper artillery piece.

Arrow IV will act more like traditional artillery, but you could potentially use TAG to assist any Homing rounds you might equip. The Thumper Artillery Canon operates pretty differently from the usual "get out of sight and rain from miles away" method, but I don't understand them well enough to really tell you how they work. I've never seen one used in a game.

A little over 2%. It's a 1/36 chance.

I see, how would be a light-medium fast jumpjetting missile quadmech, basically a quadrupedal Valkyrie or Dervish?

I thought you had to roll on number of critical hits table to see if you actually broke something though. So it's something like 41% of that 2% or some such.

>The only two choices that could work in a quad is either using A) A clan version of the Arrow IV artillery (12 crits), or an inner sphere Thumper artillery cannon, not to be mistaken with the thumper artillery piece.
Compact gyros user. Fitting IS Arrow IV or a full size Thumper is possible, as is Artillery Cannons up to the Long Tom.

Thumper Cannons have terrible range for their mass and size. I'd mount a RAC or BL-10X over one any day of the week. Long Tom Cannon or bust, really.

You can do it but you're better of trying to make something that's GOTTAGOFAST and using it in cities etc where its inherent PSR bonus gives a major boost.

Or using it as a HGR platform so you never fall over, I guess.

Read the lore, newfag

Given the immense weight of both launcher and ammo, why would anyone use Cruise Missiles?

Because of the immense range, damage and damage radius. A CM/120 still inflicts 20 damage in its outermost impact area, and at R4 and the total area is basically half a mapsheet. It's basically the biggest bang you can get without going nuclear or entering orbital bombardment territory.

The thing is, cruise missiles are the kind of thing you need big stuff to bring, like large naval vessels or a dropship. A 100,000 ton missile sub could haul a few CM/120s and fuck up a whole mapsheet.

That's right. So you have a 1/36 chance of getting a TAC and then a 15/36 to get at least one crit.

I multiplied 2.78% by 41.6% for the 15/36 and got about 1.15% chance of critting something. That sounds about right.
Someone posted a Clan update Archer (along with other unseens) with 40 Streak tubes, and another guy posted some monster vehicle with a huge number of SRM tubes a while back. That's at least 40 x 1.15+% for each shot. Frightening!

>and another guy posted some monster vehicle with a huge number of SRM tubes a while back

Consider the following: Tandem Charge SRMs.