Jump Jets, CCW's and Mechwarrior minis

[eilif]

Just picked up the game and I really like what I see. So much so that I'm picking up a bunch of Mechwarrior Miniatures with which to play the game. The 2.5d miniatures are all very well done, but I just like the feel of solid 3d miniatures.

Anywho, I like the Battletech fluff but not the rules. In my journey to do BT with MA I have a few questions.

1)Anyone have any house rules for Jump Jets?

2)Any house rules for Close combat weapons (i.e. Hatchetman). I was thinking of making them the somethign like the equivalent of missiles with a 1 inch range and a bonus to collision.

3)Anyone used MWDA miniatures for this game? If so, how did you base them?

Thanks,
Karl

[Dagger]

I'm glad you like the game so far...

1) You could implement Jump Jets as a piece of Special Equipment... using them generates heat but allows your move to ignore terrain/obstacles.

2) I think you're on the right track... 1" range... maybe with a little higher damage potential compared to a similar priced ranged weapon. I can even see a Flail type weapon doing Machine Gun type damage

3) The MWDA figs that fit the Mech Attack template (two torso weapons, left/right arm weapons) work just fine. You just need to replace the round base with a hex base of the right size (30mm, 40mm, or 50mm). You can use cardstock, cardboard, or matte-board. You can get matte-board at a hobby store like Hobby-Lobby or Michael's. The bases in Mech Attack are hex shaped only to help determine firing arcs... if you and your players can guesstimate and agree on firing arcs using round bases then give that a try.

[WaffleM]

For bases, I've also experimented with Gale Force 9's Econo Bases to base some of my miniatures in a more traditional manner.

The quality of the bases seems really good and they have that nice laser-burned scent! ;D Hopefully I'll get some pics of them posted tonight.

LINK to Econo Bases.

[eilif]

Thanks for the replies.

1)I'm leaning towards just giving all medium and light mechs jump jets but costing 2 HP (and possibly both actions) to use. I'll think of something to represent increasing the damage on both sides for a Death From above attack.

3) As the MWDA figs arrive, I'm finding that they should work pretty well. Some will be fudged a bit (center torso weapons being counted as one side or the other, double arm weapons being counted as twin linked or one being torso mounted, etc, etc) and some will be converted (mostly the really common/cheap ones) but I think they will work beautifully. It helps that alot of them are 50 cents each!

Bases-
I'm leaning toward the econobasses as well. The seem to get good feedback everywhere and I'm going to need alot.
I'd love to see some pics.

Anyone in Chicago want to play?

[davethelost]

First jump jets: I like the concept, they definitely should have a high heat cost. I see them more as an augmented leap than low level flight. I might go so far as to restrict them to light mechs only, certainly their use should be extremely limited if allowed at all on heavy mechs.

As for close combat, I have always had issues with some of the larger humanoid mechs carrying around guns and swords. It just seems to make more sense to build them into the mech itself. I'm not quite sure why that is. I just some how don't picture mechs as giant armoured humans.

I like the idea of a flail or chain style CCW doing machine gun style damage. I can also picture varrious hammers, maces, axes, and spikes on mechs for use in close combat.

The why of purpose built close combat weaponry would depend on the game/world background. I can see it making sense in a gladiatorial area type setting, or in a situation where either the availablity or effectiveness of ranged weapons was limited by some external factor.

I would like to see the game core kept about as it is, with flying mechs, shape changing mechs (Voltron, Transformers), mechs in space (Gundam, Jovian Chronicles) Gladiator Mechs, etc available as optional modules.

[WaffleM]

I get torn between "what would be logical" vs. "what would be possible". Swords don't really make logical sense for a combat vehicle, but if you have a giant walking robot vehicle why couldn't you give it a sword? It makes sense for only Light Mechs to have jump jets, but in a sci-fi universe Heavy Mechs could have them too.

Luckily Dagger grounds my crazy ideas before we end up with things like a Mech armed with "Ratchet & Clank" style Morph-o-ray that turns enemies into chickens...

[davethelost]

I hear where you are coming from.

I have great fun doing the world building to justify some of the "cool things" you can do in Sci-Fi and Fantasy, even if they don't seem to make logical sense.

[tugunmojo]

Not to high jack this thread, but the mention of fantasy in the previous post made the thought, Armor Grid: Fantasy Style, pop into my head. Just think of those possibilities!

[Dagger]

Feb 15, 2011 14:20:35 GMT -5 WaffleM said:

Luckily Dagger grounds my crazy ideas before we end up with things like a Mech armed with "Ratchet & Clank" style Morph-o-ray that turns enemies into chickens...

Hmmm... what about a particle beam that makes a Mech sprout feathers? The insulation of the feathers would cause the Mech to vent 1 less Heat at the end of the round. (^_^)

[Dagger]

Feb 14, 2011 14:46:53 GMT -5 davethelost said:

First jump jets: I like the concept, they definitely should have a high heat cost. I see them more as an augmented leap than low level flight. I might go so far as to restrict them to light mechs only, certainly their use should be extremely limited if allowed at all on heavy mechs.

As for close combat, I have always had issues with some of the larger humanoid mechs carrying around guns and swords. It just seems to make more sense to build them into the mech itself. I'm not quite sure why that is. I just some how don't picture mechs as giant armoured humans.

I like the idea of a flail or chain style CCW doing machine gun style damage. I can also picture varrious hammers, maces, axes, and spikes on mechs for use in close combat.

The why of purpose built close combat weaponry would depend on the game/world background. I can see it making sense in a gladiatorial area type setting, or in a situation where either the availablity or effectiveness of ranged weapons was limited by some external factor.

I would like to see the game core kept about as it is, with flying mechs, shape changing mechs (Voltron, Transformers), mechs in space (Gundam, Jovian Chronicles) Gladiator Mechs, etc available as optional modules.

Stop reading my thoughts... awkward!

[Sarcastro1]

Our group may try out the CC weapon idea tomorrow. Axe/Sword/Chainsaw weapons doing laser damage and crushing/smashing weapons doing missile style damage. No heat for these attacks but weapons will weigh 1/2/3 BP and must be put in an arm slot.

We may make the attack use the ram rules opposed roll for a close combat attack instead of using the target's TP. It gives heavies a chance to hit those nimble lights and keeps weird ninja swarms from hamstringing your heavy with nickel and dime stabs to the ankles. Some sort of bonus might be in order if your TP or move is higher than your opponent (size is not everything grasshopper) but we'll have to see how it plays out.

[WaffleM]

I've been toying with the idea of smashing weapons (or even ramming) having a damage pattern that would only effect the top layer of each the grid column. Sort of like the machine gun damage pattern but the hits would all be in a row. The tricky part is figuring out how to write it. Maybe a light weapon would be: "X, X+1, X+2" where "X" is the die roll? So if you roll a 4, you would damage the top most block in columns 4, 5, and 6. This would allow some of the damage to fall outside the grid (if you roll a 9, you would only damage column 9 and 10).

This also opens up some other possibilities for the medium and heavy damage patterns:
Medium could be "X, X+1, X+2, X+3" or
For added impact (the first column damage is two blocks deep):
X
X

X+1
X

X+2
X


Heavy could be "X, X+1, X+2, X+3, X+4" or
Have each column damage be two blocks deep:
X
X

X+1
X

X+2
X

Does that make sense? Can anyone think of a simpler way to write these damage patterns?

[Dagger]

I like the idea of using laser-type and missile-type patterns with attack rules that differ from normal ranged attacks. I especially like the idea of opposed rolls for close combat... it gives it a different "flavor" than ranged combat.

The problem with the x, x+1, x+2 pattern is what if x and x+2 are full but x+2 is empty... I don't see a slashing weapon causing a crit.

If existing patterns with close combat specific rules aren't enough to differentiate it from ranged combat then maybe something like this might work (Capital X being point of impact):

Xxx
x

Xxx
xx

Xxxx
xx

I'm not sure about the asymmetrical nature of those patterns though... damage would only ricochet off the higher end of the armor grid and not the lower end... and I'm not sure I'm comfortable with melee weapons causing armor blowout...(Hmmm, maybe say melee weapons don't cause blowout?).

[WaffleM]

Maybe to solve the asymmetrical issue: Right and Left hand weapons have mirror imaged damage patterns?

Right Hand:
Xxx
x

Left Hand:
xxX
__x

(Ignore the underscore line on the Left Hand pattern. The forum software keeps eliminating the extra spaces.)

Or maybe the attacker gets to choose which pattern to use upon a successful strike? This may help to balance the pattern vs not causing armor blowout.

Just some thoughts...

[Dagger]

That's a pretty good idea... Left and Right handed patterns... It would need some playtesting to check for complexity, confusion, or slowdown.