|
Post by warhippo on Jul 26, 2011 9:00:55 GMT -5
For anyone interested in close combat weaponry for Mechs, here are a couple of generic profiles :
Weapon Light Glaive : Bp = 1 / Profile = 3 deep / 1 wide Medium Glaive : Bp = 2 / Profile = 4 deep / 1 wide Heavy Glaive : Bp = 3 / Profile = 3 deep / 2 wide
Light Wrecking Ball : Bp = 1 / Profile = 1 deep / 3 wide Medium Wrecking Ball : Bp = 2 / Profile = 1 deep / 4 wide Heavy Wrecking Ball: Bp =3 / Profile = 2 deep / 3 wide
Suggested rules for their use are as follows :
1. Only available for Mechs. 2. Can only be placed in Arm Hardpoints. 3. Only function whilst Mech is in base to base combat with target. 4. Can only use 1 other CC weapon whilst employed. 5. Count all CC Weapons as causing +1 damage for determining Knockback (Knockback is another of my rule suggestions - I'll upload that later). 6. CC Weapons have Hv = 0. 7. Does not benefit from IWTS. 8. +1 to hit vs Mechs and Vehicles. 9. -2 to hit vs Troops and -1 damage.
|
|
|
Post by WaffleM on Jul 26, 2011 14:28:21 GMT -5
The tricky thing about close combat weapons is that I don't think they should "blow out" armor like ranged weapons so the damage pattern needs to be either treated like a machine gun (but then there are no glancing hits at the edge of the Armor Grid) or could possibly be written as a die roll and a series of pluses.
For example: a Light Wrecking Ball (or other slashing/smashing weapon) would have it's Dp written as "X, X+1, X+2", where "X" is the die roll. This way all the damage is in the top row of the Armor Grid only. If the player rolls an 8, the first boxes in columns 8, 9, and 10 would be marked off.
The problem with the "X, X+..." notation is that it can be a little confusing to write and read. Any thoughts on how to make it clearer?
I also thought that maybe thrusting weapons (like spears, pick axes, and ram spikes) could have a laser pattern, but that makes them a little too powerful. Maybe their pattern could involve a die roll for column and another for depth based on the size of the weapon. Light Spike D3, Medium Spike D3+1, Heavy Spike D3+2.
Close combat weapons opens up a huge can of complexity, but could be a lot of fun for gladiatorial games. What about swords causing either slashing or thrusting damage patterns based on the players choice? Charging attacks? Pole weapons with extra reach and tripping or sweeping attacks? Parrying opponents attacks? Disarming attacks? Shields? Energy melee weapons? These options could be a lot of fun, but definitely make Mech Attack into a different game. The hardest part may be to keep the balance between the ranged weapon costs and the close combat weapons...
Sorry if I sounded discouraging; that wasn't my intent. I'm excited by the thought of including melee weapons in the next round of Mech Attack rules and I'm just dumping a lot of my thoughts on the subject here. Definitely try out your ideas and report back to us! We'd love to hear how it plays out!
|
|
|
Post by Dagger on Jul 26, 2011 22:04:25 GMT -5
I'm with you on the CC weapons for mechs. I want them to have a different flavor than ranged weapons... instead of just having different damage patterns. I'd like to keep the damage simple and find other mechanics to add flavor like wafflem suggested. The problem is that it gets pretty complicated pretty quick.... and I'm not sure the complexity is worth the benefit. Maybe if it's kept simple with just a couple different CC weapons/traits. Also I don't want to create a tactic that is so strong that players feel they have to equip CC weapons in order to be competitive.
|
|
|
Post by warhippo on Jul 27, 2011 3:47:15 GMT -5
LOL! I'm not discouraged, I'm just throwing ideas out there and haven't even had a chance to playtest these suggestions yet.
For me, part of the beauty of AG is the simplicity - people like me coming up with extra rules can risk that simplicity, turning it into just another generic mech game - that's why I've tried to keep everything very easy.
I thought about different profiles and the like but ultimately decided on two different types (deep and wide) giving them generic titles to suit. Personally I don't believe that these weapons unbalance the game (though I'm only looking at the figures of course). Their main advantage is the lack of heat, the bonus to hit (but it's only a modest bonus) and the difficulty of targets breaking contact in subsequent rounds. Sure, this sort of weapon could be deadly against a Vehicle or Mech target that's only armed with Missiles (thus no chance to return fire) but the Mech still has to close the distance first.
I'll playtest them at the weekend and let you know the results. Oh and one other thought - to keep Armour Blowthrough in but to reduce the risk of it happening, the wide and shallow profile of the WreckingBall could have a double width initial target square (2 wide rather than 1).
|
|