Battletech BattleTech discussion thread: May the light of Hanse Davion guide us

It'd probably look more like Mekton Zeta. The rules there aren't per vehicle type, you simply assemble X parts (Servos) and go to town, with your build point cost being based on your servos and how much gear you've loaded on it. Tank? Torso Servo, Head Servo for the turret, and Wheel Servos. Quad? Torso servo, four leg servos, head servo. Biped? Torso servo, head servo, two leg servos, and two arm servos. Fighter jet? Torso servo, two wing servos, head servo for the cockpit. Starship? Torso servo at 1000X scale, multiple head servos for turrets.

Flying Centaur Morph? Torso servo, four leg servos, two arm servos, two wing servos, head servo...
 
Does anyone know the canonical explanation for why drone systems get proportionally heavier with the unit? Gameplay-wise, I know it is meant to balance them out, but I'm trying to understand the lore reasoning behind it. I had a thought as I was working on revised vehicle combat/construction rules.
 
It'd probably look more like Mekton Zeta. The rules there aren't per vehicle type, you simply assemble X parts (Servos) and go to town, with your build point cost being based on your servos and how much gear you've loaded on it. Tank? Torso Servo, Head Servo for the turret, and Wheel Servos. Quad? Torso servo, four leg servos, head servo. Biped? Torso servo, head servo, two leg servos, and two arm servos. Fighter jet? Torso servo, two wing servos, head servo for the cockpit. Starship? Torso servo at 1000X scale, multiple head servos for turrets.

Flying Centaur Morph? Torso servo, four leg servos, two arm servos, two wing servos, head servo...
I've played Mekton Zeta, and yes, the building rules are much better, IMO. The only disadvantage(again, IMO) is that Mekton Zeta's weapon roster is pretty bare and generic, but you have weapon building rules to cover that. Mesh this building system with Battletech's heat rules and a few modifications, and you should be good to go.
 
So, having made the move from digital (first the BattleTech game, then MegaMek) to tabletop, I have to say I'm starting to understand various mechanics and systems better. Though, I have a question: can the Locust (LCT-1E variant) be optimized better? This question came during my first match when I was pitting Locusts against each other on some flat, featureless plains.

Before I got into the nitty-gritty of Tabletop, I understood that you didn't want your 'Mechs to be entirely heat-neutral. The cost in performance wasn't worth the weaker, more consistent alpha striking capabilities. I think the Locust was one of the 'Mechs made before this meta was discovered because it doesn't follow this advice - you can run and fire all weapons on the 'Mech and cool down completely in the heat phase.

In a 'Mech on 'Mech game, the small lasers were also objectively less useful than the Medium Lasers too? They had more chances to hit, but with the penalties for range the Medium lasers were typically more useful.

Speaking of heat (in regards to heat sinks,) would it be better if they were split between the legs and center torso? In the game I ran, I ended up hitting one of the side torsos in the rear - when I got two crits (and saw that there was nothing to crit on) I consulted help on-line and found that those crits don't just disappear into thin air: they head deeper into the 'Mech.

In this case, I got two crits on the engine and effectively mission-killed it (it sunk 10 heat a turn, and was now generating 10 heat a turn. It effectively lost the ability to sink heat.) If I instead had something else to take the hits (like Heat Sinks) it might have saved the 'Mech in question with other things to hit instead of the Engine or Gyro.

Basically, what I'm asking is this: if I moved two of the heat sinks in the legs to the center torso, stripped out the Small Lasers, and put a Medium Laser in the head, would I end up with an objectively better 'Mech?
 
Quite honestly it's dead easy to build an objectively better 'mech than most canon designs. To a large degree the designers make a canon design represent better or worse engineering by changing how optimized it is. For instance the devs stated outright that they equipped the Soyal WarShip with terrible weapons because the Soyal was supposed to suck, so it got a worthless gun that weighed a tremendous amount of it's mass.

As for your plan, I'd agree you're right. What you've discovered is called Critpacking, making sure a section is chock-full of items so that there's no empty crit spaces, and thus critical hits don't travel to the center torso and blow up the engine. It's similarly a good idea to place something in the free head crit and use up the center torso spaces, so that crits are less likely to hit the pilot and engine respectively. The crit rules can make for some weird designs, for instance tanks become tougher by putting more holes in the armor (adding sponson turrets and cargo space mean potential engine crits might hit those instead).

Do note, however, that heat sinks in the leg are objectively superior to the torso: heatsinks in the legs get increased heat dispersion when in shallow water and torso sinks do not. Legs also transfer their crits to the torso slot so if the leg is hit instead, it will hit the sink instead of traveling into the side torso.
 
Jesus Christ, the more I hear about BT building and combat rules, the more I get attached to Mekton Zeta ones. But as I said before, solving these problems would result in scrapping BT and making it something else, or at least it seems to be that way to me.
 
My general feeling is that BattleTech has fairly terrible rules, and is hamstrung by the fact that the Devs are terrified of starting a new edition so they will never change the base system lest they invalidate a TRO written 30 years ago.

BattleTech's draw is it's story, a very unique world with it's own very distinctive feel, larger-than-life characters, and fantastic places. Mekton Zeta has a more solid system (albeit you can break it with a bit of effort too, I did my accident my first time playing) but it's settings are deliberately generic and less developed, Algol has what, 1/50th the source material that the Inner Sphere does?

That said I do wish Mekton would publish new material, but with Mekton Zero getting a Kickstarter for over 2.5 times it's goal seven years ago and still not having gotten published, I think it's pretty dead. It's a shame, but bad owners do that to IPs.
 
Do note, however, that heat sinks in the leg are objectively superior to the torso: heatsinks in the legs get increased heat dispersion when in shallow water and torso sinks do not. Legs also transfer their crits to the torso slot so if the leg is hit instead, it will hit the sink instead of traveling into the side torso.
Ah, I see. Well, even with the added M Laser, it’s still going to be running a maximum of 11 heat a turn with 10 heat sinks. Maybe if the design ran more hot it’d have more utility, but I think the benefits of crit-packing outweighs increased heat dissipation, in this case.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions.
Jesus Christ, the more I hear about BT building and combat rules, the more I get attached to Mekton Zeta ones. But as I said before, solving these problems would result in scrapping BT and making it something else, or at least it seems to be that way to me.
My general feeling is that BattleTech has fairly terrible rules, and is hamstrung by the fact that the Devs are terrified of starting a new edition so they will never change the base system lest they invalidate a TRO written 30 years ago.

BattleTech's draw is it's story, a very unique world with it's own very distinctive feel, larger-than-life characters, and fantastic places. Mekton Zeta has a more solid system (albeit you can break it with a bit of effort too, I did my accident my first time playing) but it's settings are deliberately generic and less developed, Algol has what, 1/50th the source material that the Inner Sphere does?

That said I do wish Mekton would publish new material, but with Mekton Zero getting a Kickstarter for over 2.5 times it's goal seven years ago and still not having gotten published, I think it's pretty dead. It's a shame, but bad owners do that to IPs.
Currently have it on a wishlist. When it goes on sale I’ll buy it and take a look.
 
Ah, I see. Well, even with the added M Laser, it’s still going to be running a maximum of 11 heat a turn with 10 heat sinks. Maybe if the design ran more hot it’d have more utility, but I think the benefits of crit-packing outweighs increased heat dissipation, in this case.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions.


Currently have it on a wishlist. When it goes on sale I’ll buy it and take a look.
In general, the lighter the 'mech the cooler it runs. Since all 'mechs get the same 10 heatsinks free, a 20 tonner with maybe 3 tons to throw at weaponry simply can't generate enough heat for it to matter (barring hot planets and liberal use of infernos). It's simply hard for bugmechs to overheat.

Once you get to medium or larger you have to start looking at heat strategy but two medium lasers won't overheat any 'mech with it's 10 free heatsinks.
 
Though, I have a question: can the Locust (LCT-1E variant) be optimized better?

As a rule, most canon mech designs or pod configurations are less than optimal (my go to example being the lament 2C and its use of heavy PPCs in placec of the CERPPCs the republic usually uses, or the number of clan omnimechs that mount loads of fixxed heat sinks instead of pod mounting them). As Ribs said, it's typically done for flavor and fluff reasons, and IMO it's probably one the devs more questionable decisions.

Before I got into the nitty-gritty of Tabletop, I understood that you didn't want your 'Mechs to be entirely heat-neutral. The cost in performance wasn't worth the weaker, more consistent alpha striking capabilities. I think the Locust was one of the 'Mechs made before this meta was discovered because it doesn't follow this advice - you can run and fire all weapons on the 'Mech and cool down completely in the heat phase.

It's my understanding that this bit is one of those things that changes massively in the normal (IE, non introtech) ruleset, because DHS become the default, weapons get hotter, TSM shows up, there are a few more ways to force enemy mechs to heat up, etc. A lot of 4 succession war and later designs can pull off a heat neutral jumping alpha.

My general feeling is that BattleTech has fairly terrible rules, and is hamstrung by the fact that the Devs are terrified of starting a new edition so they will never change the base system lest they invalidate a TRO written 30 years ago.

I'm not sure if I'd call them terrible, exactly. "Impenetrable" would be the better term.

I can understand not wanting to invalidate a ton of older units, even minor revisions have caused issues with various designs (IE, CT ammo bombs are apparently semi prevelent on very old mech designs, because the crit rules back then worked a bit different and putting ammo in the CT wasn't as dangerous).
 
BattleTech's draw is it's story, a very unique world with it's own very distinctive feel, larger-than-life characters, and fantastic places. Mekton Zeta has a more solid system (albeit you can break it with a bit of effort too, I did my accident my first time playing) but it's settings are deliberately generic and less developed, Algol has what, 1/50th the source material that the Inner Sphere does?

If that. I think Invasion Terra and Starblade Batallion were the most developed settings on Mekton Zeta(and they had what, 1 dedicated book for Starblade, 2-3 for Invasion Terra?). There is some more detail on Algol, but that is Mekton II(the previous edition) material.

That said I do wish Mekton would publish new material, but with Mekton Zero getting a Kickstarter for over 2.5 times it's goal seven years ago and still not having gotten published, I think it's pretty dead. It's a shame, but bad owners do that to IPs.

They really fucked up with Mekton Zero. I don't think it's 100% dead yet, but every month that passes brings it closer to it.
 
Code:
Swordsman SWD-2?

Mass: 40 tons
Tech Base: Inner Sphere
Chassis Config: Biped
Rules Level: Tournament Legal
Era: Age of War/Star League
Tech Rating/Era Availability: E/E-F-E-D
Production Year: 2750
Dry Cost: 6.714.960 C-Bills
Total Cost: 6.714.960 C-Bills
Battle Value: 1.226

Chassis: Unknown Standard
Power Plant: Unknown 240 Fusion XL Engine
Walking Speed: 64,8 km/h
Maximum Speed: 97,2 km/h
Jump Jets: Unknown
    Jump Capacity: 180 meters
Armor: Unknown Standard Armor
Armament:
    1  ER PPC
    2  Medium Pulse Lasers
Manufacturer: Unknown
    Primary Factory: Unknown
Communications System: Unknown
Targeting and Tracking System: Unknown

Overview:
This, untill now unknown version of supposedly extinct mech had shown up within
the ranks of the Davion Guards during the recent raid on the Halstead Station.
It is unknown whether these mechs are salvaged from some Star League era cache
or a new production, however given the fact that the mech is viewed rather
unfavorably in Federated Suns, it is most likely that these  mechs originally
served in militia on a Hegemony world, being upgraded at some point with
advanced technology, however the fact that they risked these Lostech machines
in battle means that they most likely have at least some stored for testing and
reverse engineering.


Capabilities:
Judging from the battleROMs, the mech's mobility is on par with that of Phoenix
Hawk, which would entail upping the engine to 240 rate and given all other
improvements this is most likely achieved by using supposedly extinct
extralight fusion engine type. LRM launcher has been removed altogether, while
autocannon has been replaced, by what seems to be an extended range PPC.When
used, the arm mounted medium lasers fired in a burst, rather than in one
continious beam, indicating use of pulse lasers. Combined use of PPC and jump
jets indicates us of advanced double strength heatsinks. Use of endo steel and 
ferro fibrious cannot be confirmed without examinationof salvaged or captured
example of this machine.


Battle History:
The first and so far the only sighting of these upgraded Swordsman mechs was on
Halstead Station, where at least two were used alongside other AFFS skirmishers
to good effect, contributing to destruction of some two dozen machines,
especially as on several occasions Kuritan mechwarriors were goaded into
ambushes, as they tried to bring down what was obviously a lostech mech, while
on other occasions they attracted attention of Combine troops away from more
hard pressed AFFS troops, allowing the elemets of 10th Deneb Light Cavalry and
34th Avalon Hussars to escape the traps set for them on at least three
occassions. One of the mechs was downed in the last minutes of the battle, but
it was dragged off to the Dropship, denying DCMS the salvage.


================================================================================
Equipment           Type                         Rating                   Mass 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Structure: Standard                      67 points                4,00
Engine:             XL Fusion Engine             240                       6,00
    Walking MP: 6
    Running MP: 9
    Jumping MP: 6 Standard
    Jump Jet Locations: 2 CT, 2 LT, 2 RT                                   3,00
Heat Sinks:         Double Heat Sink             11(22)                    1,00
    Heat Sink Locations: 1 LT, 1 RT
Gyro:               Standard                                               3,00
Cockpit:            Standard                                               3,00
    Actuators:      L: SH+UA+LA+H    R: SH+UA+LA+H
Armor:              Standard Armor               AV - 137                  9,00

                                                      Internal       Armor     
                                                      Structure      Factor     
                                                Head     3            9         
                                        Center Torso     12           18       
                                 Center Torso (rear)                  6         
                                           L/R Torso     10           15       
                                    L/R Torso (rear)                  5         
                                             L/R Arm     6            12       
                                             L/R Leg     10           20       

================================================================================
Equipment                                 Location    Heat    Critical    Mass 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ER PPC                                       LT        15        3         7,00
Medium Pulse Laser                           RA        4         1         2,00
Medium Pulse Laser                           LA        4         1         2,00
                                            Free Critical Slots: 24

BattleForce Statistics
MV      S (+0)  M (+2)  L (+4)  E (+6)   Wt.   Ov   Armor:      5    Points: 12
6j         3       3       1       0      2     0   Structure:  2
Special Abilities: ENE, SRCH, ES, SEAL, SOA
 
Code:
Swordsman SWD-2?

Mass: 40 tons
Tech Base: Inner Sphere
Chassis Config: Biped
Rules Level: Tournament Legal
Era: Age of War/Star League
Tech Rating/Era Availability: E/E-F-E-D
Production Year: 2750
Dry Cost: 6.714.960 C-Bills
Total Cost: 6.714.960 C-Bills
Battle Value: 1.226

Chassis: Unknown Standard
Power Plant: Unknown 240 Fusion XL Engine
Walking Speed: 64,8 km/h
Maximum Speed: 97,2 km/h
Jump Jets: Unknown
    Jump Capacity: 180 meters
Armor: Unknown Standard Armor
Armament:
    1  ER PPC
    2  Medium Pulse Lasers
Manufacturer: Unknown
    Primary Factory: Unknown
Communications System: Unknown
Targeting and Tracking System: Unknown

Overview:
This, untill now unknown version of supposedly extinct mech had shown up within
the ranks of the Davion Guards during the recent raid on the Halstead Station.
It is unknown whether these mechs are salvaged from some Star League era cache
or a new production, however given the fact that the mech is viewed rather
unfavorably in Federated Suns, it is most likely that these  mechs originally
served in militia on a Hegemony world, being upgraded at some point with
advanced technology, however the fact that they risked these Lostech machines
in battle means that they most likely have at least some stored for testing and
reverse engineering.


Capabilities:
Judging from the battleROMs, the mech's mobility is on par with that of Phoenix
Hawk, which would entail upping the engine to 240 rate and given all other
improvements this is most likely achieved by using supposedly extinct
extralight fusion engine type. LRM launcher has been removed altogether, while
autocannon has been replaced, by what seems to be an extended range PPC.When
used, the arm mounted medium lasers fired in a burst, rather than in one
continious beam, indicating use of pulse lasers. Combined use of PPC and jump
jets indicates us of advanced double strength heatsinks. Use of endo steel and
ferro fibrious cannot be confirmed without examinationof salvaged or captured
example of this machine.


Battle History:
The first and so far the only sighting of these upgraded Swordsman mechs was on
Halstead Station, where at least two were used alongside other AFFS skirmishers
to good effect, contributing to destruction of some two dozen machines,
especially as on several occasions Kuritan mechwarriors were goaded into
ambushes, as they tried to bring down what was obviously a lostech mech, while
on other occasions they attracted attention of Combine troops away from more
hard pressed AFFS troops, allowing the elemets of 10th Deneb Light Cavalry and
34th Avalon Hussars to escape the traps set for them on at least three
occassions. One of the mechs was downed in the last minutes of the battle, but
it was dragged off to the Dropship, denying DCMS the salvage.


================================================================================
Equipment           Type                         Rating                   Mass
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internal Structure: Standard                      67 points                4,00
Engine:             XL Fusion Engine             240                       6,00
    Walking MP: 6
    Running MP: 9
    Jumping MP: 6 Standard
    Jump Jet Locations: 2 CT, 2 LT, 2 RT                                   3,00
Heat Sinks:         Double Heat Sink             11(22)                    1,00
    Heat Sink Locations: 1 LT, 1 RT
Gyro:               Standard                                               3,00
Cockpit:            Standard                                               3,00
    Actuators:      L: SH+UA+LA+H    R: SH+UA+LA+H
Armor:              Standard Armor               AV - 137                  9,00

                                                      Internal       Armor    
                                                      Structure      Factor    
                                                Head     3            9        
                                        Center Torso     12           18      
                                 Center Torso (rear)                  6        
                                           L/R Torso     10           15      
                                    L/R Torso (rear)                  5        
                                             L/R Arm     6            12      
                                             L/R Leg     10           20      

================================================================================
Equipment                                 Location    Heat    Critical    Mass
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ER PPC                                       LT        15        3         7,00
Medium Pulse Laser                           RA        4         1         2,00
Medium Pulse Laser                           LA        4         1         2,00
                                            Free Critical Slots: 24

BattleForce Statistics
MV      S (+0)  M (+2)  L (+4)  E (+6)   Wt.   Ov   Armor:      5    Points: 12
6j         3       3       1       0      2     0   Structure:  2
Special Abilities: ENE, SRCH, ES, SEAL, SOA
An updated version of the Swordsman? Modern equipment, bigger engine, jump-capable... basically an improvement in every way but in cost and availability as I understand it.
 
So...

A little while back, I said I'd take a look at trying to modify vehicle construction rules. As for what I have thus far:
0AqISIU.png
The main thing I did here was making it so that vehicles operated on the same critical hit system as BattleMechs did. At the start, a vehicle will have 28/72 Crits Used*, accounting for various things like sensors, motive systems, the Engine, including spots for a commander, gunner, and driver**.

Vehicles will now always have five hit locations: including a center, which will be present regardless if there is a turret or not. Most of the space on the sides is already taken up by essential functions. Therefore to compensate, the Center hit slot will, by default, have 36 critical slots (30 free, once essential equipment is accounted for,) available for allocation at the start of the process. Or, just enough for a Long Tom.

In addition, weapons mounted on the center may be "pointed" in a forward, rear, right, or left firing arc. Alternatively, it may be mounted on a turret if one is present.

Some misc thoughts:
  • Vehicles, on account of using the same crit systems as BattleMechs, may now mount alternative forms of Heat Sink (DHS, CHS, LHS, etc.)
  • Vehicles now track heat (to a limited extent.) Essentially using the same compromise I proposed earlier, where a Vehicle needs only as much heat sinks to fire the highest heat-generating weapon. As long as the total amount of heat generated does not exceed the heat sunk***, the vehicle may fire any combination of weapons. In addition, ballistic and missile weapons now also generate heat for vehicles. Also, cruise/flank generates as much heat as walk/run for BattleMechs.
  • Destruction of a section does not mean the destruction of a vehicle. However, losing the front means the loss of the driver (vehicle cannot move, but can still fire and operate normally.) Losing the sides means the same. And losing the rear would mean losing the engine. Not exactly an improvement.
  • Now that vehicles can track criticals, they may make use of alternative internal structure types.
  • For Turrets, decided to use the same rules for BattleMech turrets. A mass cost still needs to be paid, but the turret itself only takes up a single critical slot. May revise later.
Overall... it looks like I managed to translate the Merkava pretty well into the new system. I don't think I can manage it for everything. At the very least, vehicles without turrets will have to suddenly allocate mass towards center armor - which would either make them heavier or reduce armor along other sides, making them more fragile.

Thoughts?

*Compared to 31/78 for mechs. Originally I had intended to give them both the same amount of space, but it had slipped my mind as I was creating it. To get the additional six critical slots, I would probably turn the 6-crit Front and Rear into 9-crit spaces.

** Ruling is that combat vehicles will only need a crew of three. Critical space is low enough as is, and I don't want to allocate more.

*** Considered allowing it but forcing a 2d6 roll against the amount of heat generated over the amount of heat sunk. If unsuccessful, the crew is stunned for a turn on account of the excessive heat.
 
So vehicles will need more a lot shooting to be put down for good. Big advantage over the mechs is that they don't have rear torso armor that could be exploited.
 
So vehicles will need more a lot shooting to be put down for good. Big advantage over the mechs is that they don't have rear torso armor that could be exploited.
Though, the Merkava (like I said) was a vehicle that ended up winning in this conversion. Vehicles using ICE or Fuel Cell Engines might need to allocate more weight for heat sinks to fire their weapons/drive (when they didn't before.) Vehicles that didn't use to have to allocate for turret armor now have to account for such.

Made some more changes to the system. In terms of crits:
  • Front/Rear Sections: have 3 more critical slots, bringing them up to the same amount as BattleMechs(1).
  • Sensors: Moved from the Left and Right to the Center and Rear (2).
  • Life Support: split between the Driver and the Commander/Gunner, to reflect separate compartments. Losing Life Support to a critical hit has effects for managing heat (see below.)
  • Crew: The driver is in the Driver's Compartment. Gunner/Commander merged into the "Crew Compartment(3)."
Engines in particular:
  • Engines (as long as there is enough room) may be placed in the front, rear, or center of the vehicle.
  • When placing an Engine in a section, assume it takes priority over other components placed there (minus sensors) - an XL Engine in the Front would require the use of an alternative control system(3), as it would displace the driver compartment there.
  • For the Front and Rear, larger-sized engines will fill the empty criticals in their starting section before spilling out into others. (Engines in the Center, of course, will have enough room to not require this.) Additional Engine Criticals must be allocated by the designer to either the left/right sides, the center, or a combination of both.
  • (I.E. when designing a tank with an XL Fusion Engine, the Designer [once they have finished filling 8 critical slots in the rear] may either put the last four crits in the center, split them between the left and right sides equally [at 2 crits each] or a mixture of both [2 crits in the center, 1 crit on each side]. They may not allocate critical slots to the front unless the engine is mounted there [in which case no critical slots may be allocated to the rear.])
Heat Management(4):
  • Starting at 2 points of heat above the heat dissipation of the vehicle(5), roll 2d6 for each crew compartment. Rolling below this margin results in the crew of the section in question being stunned for a turn from the heat. 13 points of heat above the vehicle's tolerance results in any crew being automatically stunned for a turn.
  • (I.E. Going 4 heat points requires that I roll 2d6 and 4+ to prevent crew stun. It is possible for some crew to be stunned and not the others: the driver may be fine, but the commander/gunner may be stunned.)
  • At 14-24 points, additionally, roll against the Margin (minus 13,) for each crew compartment. Rolling below this margin results in the crew of the section being killed by the heat.
  • (I.E. Going 20 heat points above dissipation automatically stuns the vehicle crew, and then I must roll 2d6 at 7+ (20-13=7) to prevent crew deaths as a result.)
  • Life Support has a critical role in this system. If a crew compartment lacks Life Support in their section when rolling for heat treat as if the current heat is 13 points higher than what it is. (Meaning that crew would be automatically stunned and will have to roll against the chance for death.
  • In addition, if a crew compartment is in the same section as an engine critical space, treat heat as if it is 13 points higher than what it is. This stacks with losing life support in a system.
As for a vehicle that loses a little bit from this system (and illustrates that it has a far way to go,) the Savannah Master.
3sH6y5y.png
Ultimately illustrates that vehicles without turrets are going to be more fragile, porting them over. Because it didn't normally need any armor there, I had to take away some from the Front and Left/Right sides to add it to the center.

Something weird about my ruling that a vehicle (only) needed a crew of three is that the assumption carried over to smaller vehicles too. As a result, the Savannah now has three people controlling it (when it only needed one.) Other than making it more resistant to heat effects on crew (2 compartments versus 1,) it's not really affecting gameplay. It's just something that I haven't figured out how to create rules for as of yet.

(1) Vehicles have an advantage here - while they both have the same maximum crits, the starting vehicle crits the same as those with a BattleMech with removed Lower Arm/Hand Actuators. (27/78)

(2) Additional sensors in the Center reflects the additional situational awareness the vehicle commander needs to take control of the vehicle. Rear Sensor represents cameras/rearview mirrors/what have you the Driver uses to keep track of where they've been and where they are going.

(3) Alternatively, one may use a "Combined" Crew Compartment, which essentially added the driver to the same compartment as the Commander and Gunner. Basically like the armored capsule the T-14 uses.

Moving the compartment and associated systems (Combined Crew Compartment [3 Crit] and Life Support) to the Front adds an additional sensor crit to the Center Section. Conversely moving to the center adds an additional sensor crit to the Front.

The main benefit is allowing the combined crew to either be in the front or the center of the vehicle. While moving it to the center allows for all the crew to be better protected by thicker armor, moving it to the front allows for the vehicle to deal with heat better (see elsewhere in this post.) It also saves 1 critical space by cutting out separate life support.

Downsides are that size all the crew members are in the same space, destroying it (or landing a crit) will kill all the crew members inside. In addition, whereas a normal combat vehicle has separate driver/crew life support systems, making the crew overall more resilient to life support crits, this variant shares a single life support system. This also influences the ability of the crew to handle heat.

(4) Not sure about adding heat management mechanics to combat vehicles.

On one hand, it adds a fundamental part of the game back into the unit type. Heat management forces the player to make decisions in combat, and a counter-balance against just firing all the weapons you have in every turn. In addition, it also helps to standardize heat damage mechanics (which I am always a fan of standardizing mechanics.)

However, it also removes some of the simplicity of combat vehicles. And since I'm doing that already, the question then becomes "Why don't I just apply the BattleMech heat system?" I don't know how I feel about that.

(5) Based on the earlier compromise, with the realization that tracking heat means that a combat vehicle can track heat damage.
 
Maybe vehicles should need crew in proportion to their weaponry? Only a driver needed if the vehicle has fixed-forward facing guns, gunner needed for a turret, another gunners if it also has rear-facing guns, two more gunners for sponson turrets?
 
Maybe vehicles should need crew in proportion to their weaponry? Only a driver needed if the vehicle has fixed-forward facing guns, gunner needed for a turret, another gunners if it also has rear-facing guns, two more gunners for sponson turrets?
I mean I like the idea, I just think that it could get complicated quick (would each crew member have their own gunnery skill? How do you track who fires what? Firing Arcs would necessitate up to five gunners [front, right, left, rear, turret,] depending on how many sponson turrets you have, that could easily be more...)

My solution, in the end, was to implement alternative control schemes for 1-man or 2-man vehicles, and have 3(+) crew be abstracted:

Driver (1 Crew)
  • A single Driver commands this vehicle.
  • The driver must have both a driving and gunnery skill, similar to 'Mechwarriors.
  • Weapons may only be mounted in a front-facing firing arc.
  • Controls weight is reduced by half, rounding up. In the event, controls are at 0.5 tons already, reduce fully to 0 (reflecting the negligible weight the controls take up in this case.)[1] In addition, space is also saved (Remove the Gunner/Commander crew compartment in the center vehicle.)
Driver/Gunner (2 Crew)
  • Alternatively: Driver/Navigator, Pilot/Co-Pilot.
  • The vehicle is controlled by a team of two.
  • Gunner may operate weapons in one firing arc (Front, Left, Right, Rear, Turret) at a time. Attempting to use multiple firing arcs at once will impose an additional to-hit penalty of 2 to all targets (to reflect the concentration and effort required to maintain situational awareness and operate weapons systems.
  • The crew must all be in the same compartment.
  • Controls weight is reduced by half, down to 0.5 tons at minimum, again reflecting the lower weight of the controls in question. Unlike with a driver-only vehicle, these may not further be reduced to 0 tons. Space is also saved (remove the life support and driver crits normally in front of the vehicle.)
Driver/Gunner/Commander (3+ Crew)
  • The Driver handles all piloting-related rolls.
  • The Gunner handles all gunnery-related rolls.
  • The Commander is regarded to maintain situational awareness.[2] The crew suffers no additional penalties for aiming that are not imposed already.
  • For additional "crew," the designer may specify whether this weight is in automated systems or physical crew members (if sufficient numbers of the latter, the driver/gunner may be regarded as sub-officers, who oversee engineers, lesser gunners, etc.) This does not affect the combat capabilities of the vehicle in question and is purely a fluff move at this level of play.[3]
[1] Fixes the increased fragility on the Savannah Master. The extra 0.5 tons can be put into armor.

[2] Considered giving the Commander a skill value, though I'm not sure what it would do. An idea I had was that it would essentially be the other "half" of the Mechwarrior piloting skill taken up by the Driver: handling things like using superchargers, generating false targets with ECM, etc. Thoughts?

[3] Human crew members vs automated systems play more a role in extended campaigns. Having more human crew members means more hands in repairing or maintaining the vehicle in question, for example. However, automated systems mean you have to lug around fewer supplies and mount fewer quarters on your DropShips, saving space and weight for other things. It will depend on the attitudes and doctrine of the faction in question.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top