LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Enjoy conversations with Battletech fans. Exchange ideas, ask questions, post new content.

Moderators: AVA MANGO TWO, Ravion Hawk, Steve Ronin

eLMsm
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:20 pm

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by eLMsm »

Hi Steve Ronin, hi Grognard, I went to said Supplementary Rules Forum and I tried to look for a way to post a new topic, but I couldn’t find that way. Apparently registration is necessary to post new topics at official BT website.

Grognard, I prefer that you, while logged in at said official BT website that has said Supplementary Rules Forum, post a new topic there called Many ?s about Land-Air ‘Mechs and post a link to page 1 of this topic LAMs old issues and how did you fix them? here at BTU. Thanks.
When do I “retreat” ? Only when I want to re+treat myself to eating cookies here in VT of USA. Here in VT, outside temperatures can get very cold; I suppose my miniatures won’t get overheated, ha ha.

User avatar
Steve Ronin
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 5436
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 2:40 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by Steve Ronin »

hey man.
what is going on with you and TPTB over at the official site?
Groggy saw your post.
He went and created a whole thread.
it was up less than 10 minutes before being locked and deleted from the site.
Plus, he got a 90 day warning.
I'm pinging people, and i know he has too.
HE is a little PISSED.

but really?
:?:
Image

REPLY to RONIN'S RAMBLINGS HERE

eLMsm
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:20 pm

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by eLMsm »

I don’t know about myself vs. Official BT website Administrators and Moderators. I theorize that the Moderators and Administrators of Official BT website don’t like being outsmarted and/or outfoxed and/or don’t like LAMs very much and/or don’t like beings that aren’t desensitized and/or that aren’t corporately greedy. I have chosen to interact with others via friendlinesses, but TPTB have chosen to interact via fear. I think ATN had the same problem before he was banned from Official BT website. I like to use magic; Moderators & Administrators of Official BT website like strict science.
When do I “retreat” ? Only when I want to re+treat myself to eating cookies here in VT of USA. Here in VT, outside temperatures can get very cold; I suppose my miniatures won’t get overheated, ha ha.

User avatar
Steve Ronin
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 5436
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 2:40 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by Steve Ronin »

okay. Yeah, I'm understanding were there could be some friction.

way back in the day, when it was FASA, the developers created SHADOWRUN and BATTLETECH.
BattleTech is very hard science and near future fiction based.
SHADOWRUN is a combination of Neuromancer and magic and Cyberpunk.

...and TPTB have alway worked hard to keep that delineation.
i believe you and ATN ran head first into that wall.

I think you have some good ideas and concepts worth exploring.
I will run them by some other fan sites for their consideration.
Some of your other ideas are solidly magic based, and I believe they should stay in the ShadowRun universe.
Image

REPLY to RONIN'S RAMBLINGS HERE

eLMsm
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:20 pm

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by eLMsm »

Hi Grognard, you might want to also post a link to page 1 of this topic on www.Sarna.net/forums BattleTech General Forum. Just an idea, and have a great day. :) My friend, Bill Wilson, said he hopes he is going to register at www.Sarna.net/forums , www.BattleTechUniverse.org , and www.Mordel.net Forums at about June 2nd.

Hi Steve Ronin, I’m guessing you’re communicating about my Positive Traits and Negative Traits topic of “magic” based rules. Note that I tried to keep a balance between real life and Phantom Combat “magic” like Traits rules.
When do I “retreat” ? Only when I want to re+treat myself to eating cookies here in VT of USA. Here in VT, outside temperatures can get very cold; I suppose my miniatures won’t get overheated, ha ha.

eLMsm
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:20 pm

Bill Wilson’s idea: let LAMs use Hand Actuators/Claws in aerospace fighter mode to grab or smash or move or throw nouns

Post by eLMsm »

Let’s read each of your replies about that. Bill had a 55 ton LAM equipped with Claws and TSM to grab hold of two of our opponents’ Clan Battle Armor to smash them against each other using attacks somewhat similar to punching thrashing attacks in a space hex! Those two Battle Armor were instantly destroyed! :lol: :twisted:
When do I “retreat” ? Only when I want to re+treat myself to eating cookies here in VT of USA. Here in VT, outside temperatures can get very cold; I suppose my miniatures won’t get overheated, ha ha.

Riflemech
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 12:03 am

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by Riflemech »

eLMsm wrote:
Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:44 pm
Yeah, this LAMs old issues and how we are fixing them topic is kind of an old topic, though on another BT website's Forum, I think bg.battletech.com/forums , but I'm not sure, (I didn’t register at that website because of all the register information terms, and my guardian didn’t want me registering there because it’s a commercial website) ; I read that the BT Interstellar Operations Rulebook rules for LAMs were republished with new rules. Is that true or false?
I don't know but an errata just came out.

I don't think any LAM is too difficult to defeat; in fact I challenge you to design the ultimate best LAMs to play against my units, provided that you allow my units to use fair and balanced rules, and provided that your LAMs use these rules that I've retyped (an Aussie mailed them to me) along with Interestellar Operations rules for LAMs; these rules for LAMs greatly expand on some ideas you each posted, and then there's some more ideas for LAMs that I've retyped from a letter that that Aussie mailed me:
We never thought that LAMs were difficult to defeat. They're more challenging in lower tech eras but even then there's various counters against them. Newer more advanced eras have even more, making it more a challenge to use a LAM. We also never allowed super jumps. You either jumped or flew.


I'm guessing these are house rules but I'm having trouble figuring out what pages you're referring to.

1a, p. 105: "LAM" must be acronym for: "Land-Air 'Mech" (like if LAM mounts an ICE engine with a critical slot in each side torso for turbines and is in atmosphere or water) , or "Land-Aerospace 'Mech" (like if LAM mounts a fusion engine, or if LAM mounts both a fusion engine and an ICE engine) . That is a clarification.
IO pg 114. LAMs can only mount standard or compact fusion engines. All units can only mount one engine, legally. The only multi-engine unit I know of is the Banshee Aereospace Fighter. It also has the Illegal Quirk.

(I'd be okay with ICE, FC, and Fission Engines but that'd come under House Rules. The earlier two can't use Jump Jets so would be using Jet Engines or Turbo Props. Same thing as Jump Jets, just fluffed different and a max thrust of 9 for props.)

Jump Jets can also be mounted in the Center Torso and Legs.

1b, p. 105 and 114: allow LAM to mount a Small Dual Cockpit because Avionics consumes a critical slot in LAM’s Head location; and because both Clan Jade Falcon, and Word of Blake had LAMs that each had a Dual Cockpit.
IO pg 114. There is no small Dual Cockpit. The closest would be a Tripod Cockpit. It's essentially a standard cockpit and the old Dual Cockpit in one slot. IO pg 165. It isn't legal to use though. I'd allow under House Rules because of Clan Jade Falcon's LAM program. Until we get those LAMs stated though, I don't know what they're really using. What Word of Blake LAM used a Dual Cockpit?

2, p. 106: While any LAM, that changes conversion mode, does
1D6*(LAM’s total tonnage) / 5 to infantry swarming it.
Infantry take 1D6 and fall damage from Level 2. LAMs can also suffer critical hits. IO pg 106.


3a, p. 106: “Standard LAMs” shall be reworded as “Trimodal LAMs” because “Standard LAMs” implies they are current Standard Rules (Total Warfare rules) .
Trimodal LAMs are referred to as Standard because all but a previous prototype are Trimodal. The only Bimodal LAM (That we know of.) is the Shadow Hawk LAM which has 2 variants. Trimodal LAMs are the standard.


3b, p. 106 replace the AirMech Piloting of Aerospace and AirMech Gunnery of BattleMech both with VTOL/WiGE.
I wouldn't do this unless you're House Ruling an Automech from Nebula California because it adds another required skill to the pilot. They already spend more time in training learning to use Mechs and ASFs.



4a, p. 107: Omit entire sentence “If a LAM enters the space/atmosphere …” because space/atmosphere interface hexes shouldn't be capable of destroying LAMs outright.

That's for AirMech and BattleMech Mode in a caccoon. That's because it'll burn up on re-entry. They're not designed for it. Even Fighter mode LAMs can have the same problems Aerospace Units, like entering the atmosphere backwards.


4b, about p. 107: Damage of a LAM's gyro doesn't hinder conversion at all (in theory, the gyro is an internal component that doesn't bother conversion equipment) ; and a LAM isn't required to mount a gyro either; and if that LAM doesn't mount a gyro, then it must rely on its sensors for balance and all of its equipment must be symmetrically tonnaged balanced (in theory, sensors can guide a LAM for balance by studying the terrain for it to walk/run/sprint/crawl/dangle/climb/land on) , or it can spend 1 additional MP per hex it enters to maintain balance (this is basically careful MP from TO) . However, a hit to any conversion slot of a LAM keeps said LAM from changing from one mode to another mode (in theory a LAM can't convert when its conversion takes one or more critical hits) a hit to a combustion chamber critical slot has the same effect as an Aerospace Fighter hit to its engine (for fairness); and a hit to one or more launch/landing wheels applies a +5 modifier made for all Aerospace Fighter mode launches/landings of LAM (again for fairness).

I could see some of this for QuadLAMs but not Bipeds. They'd be falling too much. Even Quads would fall if landing or trying to walk.



5a, p. 108: A LAM may carry noun(s) in any mode (not just BattleMech mode) , but each Hand Held weapon a LAM uses in Aerospace Fighter mode uses nose firing arc and there must be at least 1 point of armor for all of those hand held weapons when used in a space & atmosphere interface hex or in a space hex (all spacecraft including aerospace fighters are each required at least 1 point of armor per location) ; all Hand Held objects carried by a LAM in AirMech xor Aerospace Fighter mode can't mass more than 10% of said LAM's total tonnage, but if they do, then they impose a -1 cruising movement point xor -1 thrust movement point per each additional 10% (or fraction thereof) per that LAM's total tonnage. A weapon mounted on a LAM's arm in Aerospace Fighter mode uses nose firing arc (for realism) , but a weapon mounted exclusively on one arm of a LAM arm in Aerospace Fighter mode should use only its corresponding left or right nose arc instead of the full nose arc given how that the arms are aerodynamic in Aerospace Fighter mode and also given how that a weapon mounted on a LAM's arm might have difficulty establishing LOS given how the other arm might block LOS (yeah, i know, TW rules say "Units don't block LOS." but there are exceptions like grounded DropShips and i think mobile structures and other grounded large spacecraft?
We've got our own rules for hand-helds. An arm mounted weapon can be designated as handheld and use all the Physical hand-held weapon rules. Ammo using weapons must have 1 ton of ammo accompanying the weapon. They can't use ammo from other bins. So a Wolverine with an AC/5 and ton of ammo in the right arm can designate that a handheld with ammo and drop it or pick it up.


5b, p. 108: a LAM may use Improved Jump Jet(s) with zero heat generated from them(it) , or Prototype Jump Jet(s) or Standard Jump Jet(s) with 1 heat point generated from each of them(it) because minimum 3 points of heat and/or 1 point of heat per every three hexes jumpglided via AirMech MP could perhaps be way too confusing for players learning LAMs .
As far as I know, LAMs can use any Jump Jets as long as the follow the rules for them. I'd also stick with heat as put written in IO and the Jump Jet rules. As a House Rule I would allow only 1 or 2 jump jets for Conventional Fighter LAMs. Also LAMs are Tournament Legal because they are more complicated than Standard Units.


5c, about p. 108: When any LAM performs a jumpgliding movement to do a DFA in AirMech mode, it has an additional +2 modifier applied due to its wings being deployed that make it very difficult for a 'Mech to DFA a target in addition to all other modifiers (in theory, wings do provide lift that would significantly interfere with an AirMech's ability to do a DFA). How about having each jump jet not used for elevation up/down xor hex movement work like careful movement so that any LAM can get a -1 modifier bonus when doing said DFA attack against said target?
We don't use a jumpglide. It's either VTOL or WiGE when flying in Airmech mode. We don't do DFA in AirMech either. Their wings are big enough to allow flight so would make DFA more difficult.

5d, p. 108, Publish “GOING IN” section on p. 108 Movement Phase for consistency of game playing, then and replace those two words of “GOING IN” with “More AirMech Movements” .

6a, p. 109: What about +2 piloting modifier for leg damage of table of p. 110?

6b, p. 109: How about a -4 modifier for LAM to land on flat land?

6c, p. 109: Turn Mode, add LAM’s Attacker Movement Modifier to Failed Maneuver Table 2D6 roll.
Turn Modes are one of the things about the new LAM rules we really don't like so ignore them. We also use the regular targeting modifiers. Not the aerospace ones for AirMech mode.



6d, p. 109: AirMech may use Overdrive, and it's attacker movement modifier is equal to Flank attacker movement modifier plus 1.

6e, p. 109: AirMech may use Skilled Evading, but AirMech must make a successful Piloting Skill Roll with AirMech’s current Attacker Movement Modifier added in addition to all other applicable modifiers per hex AirMech moves into while using Skilled Evading of which said AirMech’s Attacker Movement Modifier is multiplied by 1D6 Skilled Evadng modifier, and add that multiplication product in addition to all other modifiers to avoid falling or crashing; but disregard that Piloting Skill Roll if Character, that is controlling said AirMech’s Skilled Evasive, is not making any attack(s) during that turn he or she is using Skilled Evasive.
We use overdrive.

We also use the rules listed in TO for Vehicles when flying in AirMech.

6f, about p. 109: Each flying AirMech can be subject to anti-specialist ability -2 to-hit modifier (see TO) and/or subject to anti-aircraft targeting -2 to-hit modifier (see SO p. 193) (for fairness) .
We use AA as we can. If that means a lot of stacking so be it. Flying units should stay away from AA units.

7, p. 111: LAM B--- Bay Critical Hit Table omit “B--- Type” list, and move other list of that table to merge into LAM B--- Bay Ordnance Table, and have said other list to the right of the lists in that latter table. Put "Fuel" , “Inferno” , and “TAG” as a sublist at bottom of table.
Everything that can be put in a bomb bay should be listed, including what's listed, Recon Cameras, external consumables pods, and nukes.

8, p. 112: How about allowing AirMech to be “hull down” ?
I don't know why not.


9, p. 112: How do physical attacks affect AirMech “flying” movement(s) including jump jet(s) exhaust attack or an AirMech doing a thrashing attack against infantry in atmosphere?
Flying AirMechs can only conduct a Ram Attack. I don't know what a thrashing attack against infantry is. As far as the Jump Jet attack, not while flying. On the ground? Maybe but I'm not sure if the damage would be reduced or not. It'd be something to ask in the BT forums.


10, p. 113: Does Partial Wing -3 heat points effect actually “game balances” the Primitive Prototype Jump Jet(s) Piloting Skill Roll landing +3 modifier if LAM uses them?
I don't think so. The -3 heat points works with all heat sinks. The +3 landing modifier for the primitive JJs is because they cause problems with the gyro and stability.

11a, p. 114: Remember, that fuel used for thrust must have an additional tonnage of 2% for fuel pumps for fuel suppli(es) , fuel pumps are integral to respective fuel supplies and so fuel pumps don't need extra critical slots, and no free fuel (so no zero tonnage 80 free fuel points) when constructing a LAM in the same manner as ammo; and a LAM may start with any amount of fuel provided tonnage and critical slots are available, and said LAM doesn't get any reaction mass that has 0 mass as part of conversion equipment tonnage (reaction mass that has 0 mass makes no sense) .
I have no idea where this is from. LAMs can add fuel at 1 ton per crit, each has 80 points of fuel.


11b, p. 114: a LAM's combustion chambers for Aerospace Fighter mode's thrust (if desired instead of using jump jets for thrusting) occupy one critical slot per its engine's engine rating divided by 50 (a divisor of 50 is negotiable and realistic given the sizes of combustion chambers in regards to an engine rating) , and these critical slots must be symmetrically balanced in torso and/or leg location(s) if said LAM doesn't mount a gyro (otherwise there's going to be difficulty of maintaining balance, and these positions of combustion chambers are where real life aerodynamic fighters can have their combustion chambers)
.

Obviously a house rule. I wouldn't use it. How much thrust does it provide? Engine rating /50? That would mean a Stinger LAM would actually lose speed. It's Thrust speed is 6/9 now. This would drop the Speeds to 4/6.


12, p. 114: Weapons Locations: What about legs?
I'm going to guess that since, Legs are listed as being aft in fighter mode that legs are an accidental omission there.


13, p. 114 Conversion Equipment shall use Tactical Operations rules for Decimal Fractional Accounting.
I'm okay with that for custom units.


14a, p. 114: B--- Bay(s) : How about allowing entirely optional additional b--- bay(s) in Head (when LAM rolls in Fighter mode) , Arm(s) , CT, Leg(s) ?
I'd be okay with that if there's a free critical space.

14b, p. 114: Each LAM may mass up to 200 tons because superheavy BatteMechs and DropShuttles can each mass up to 200 tons.

15a, p. 114: allow a LAM to be constructed as a Four-Legged LAM (with both front legs replacing both corresponding arms) , and Safe Thrust shall equal Walk MP + 0.

15b, p. 114: allow a LAM to be constructed as a Three-Legged LAM (with a Leg replacing corresponding arm) , and Safe Thrust shall equal Walk MP + 1.

15c, p. 114: allow a LAM to be constructed as a Two-Legged LAM (with no legs replacing corresponding arms) , and Safe Thrust shall equal Walk MP + 2.
I'm totally cool with Superheavy LAMs, QuadLAMs, and TripodLAMs. I don't see the reason for playing with the Walking and Thrust speeds. I'm also not sure about a leg replacing an arm. So the Tripod would have 3 legs and 1 arm?


16a, p. 114 Provided that tonnage and critical slot(s) are available: LAMs may have internal cargo carrying capacity, and LAMs may mount any type(s) engine(s) , any type(s) of gyro(s) , any type(s) of internal structure(s) , and some other item(s) (such as Chameleon Light Polarization Shield , Null Signature System, Void Signature System) , and Extra Large Weapon(s).
I agree with the cargo space. I can agree with the other systems. I'd say they don't operate during conversion but work otherwise. With Engines and Gyros, I'm okay with ones that don't take up additional space. I'd be against XLs and the like as they're in the side torso so would effect the conversion process. I'd be against large weapons for the same reason. I'd be okay with IS as long as their crits can all be in one location.


16b, p. 114: LAMs may mount any type of armor except modular armor unless LAM doesn’t convert while mounting said modular armor and Tournament Host/Gamemaster/Gamemistress gives approval.
I'm okay with any armor as long as all the crits can fit in one location.

16c, p. 114: LAMs can't use side torso turreted weapons in AirMech or aerofighter mode because the side torso wing structure totally interferes with the rotating of said side torso turrets (a side torso turret would physically move against the wing structure and be stopped by it) .
I picture side torso weapons as being in the wings.

17a, p. 114: A LAM's 'Mech structure & Aerospace Fighter structure each have a minimal tonnage equal to LAM's tonnage multiplied by its maximum thrust (equal to maximum Sprinting MP) it can do in one TW turn divided by 200 (this is the same formula used to calculate practically a 'Mech's composite structure and aerospace structure of an aerodyne small craft) a Bimodal LAM has its tonnage multiplied by 10% for conversion equipment, and a Trimodal LAM's conversion equipment has a tonnage equal to said LAM's tonnage multiplied by 5% (in theory, a Bimodal LAM's conversion equipment functions like a 360 degree turret and a Trimodal LAM's conversion equipment functions like a 360 degree turret but not as fast to allow from BattleMech mode to AirMech mode & vice versa and from AirMech mode to Aerospace Fighter mode and vice versa) .
What?

17b, p. 115: Replace "Landing Gear" with "Wheel" and each Wheel may use current published rules, or each Wheel occupies 1 critical slot per arm xor one critical slot per corresponding leg and 1 critical slot per side torso for each of its four launch&landing wheels (this is in accordance with real life aerodynamic fighters' wheel positions) ; its conversion Avionics equipment occupies 1 critical slot in each of its center torso xor head, left arm, right arm, left leg, right leg, two critical slots in its left torso and two critical slots in its right torso locations (in theory, conversion Avionics that causes the head, arms, and side torsoes to transform would require these positions of conversion equipment) .
Landing gear, include wheels. I don't know where you're getting 4. I'd be okay with moving Torso Landing Gear to the Legs and even removing the Center one to have 1 in each armor as a custom LAM. I'm okay with moving the Head Crit to the Center Torso for a custom LAM. I don't get the rest of what you said about Avionics.

17c, p. 115: All jet boosters used by a LAM occupy critical 1 critical slot per torso or 1 critical slot per leg (this is reasonable given the tonnage of various jet boosters) ; a LAM that mounts jet boosters may use them for additional movement when using AirMech "flying" movement (in theory if a VTOL can use jet boosters, then so should a LAM) LAMs in aerofighter modes can't use jet boosters while in space.
You want to have LAMs mount VTOL Jet Boosters? Isn't that kind of redundant as they're already mounting Jets (Jump Jets?)


17d, p. 115: A LAM may be constructed as a FrankenLAM (see SO p. 189); if said constructing will use one or more different standard tonnage limb(s)/torso component(s), then the LAM in Aerospace Fighter mode must make a control roll or spend 1 additional thrust point to maintain balance when flying in an atmosphere/space if it doesn't have a functioning gyro (this is realistic and said additional 1 thrust point spent is like TO rule for careful movement)
I want to agree but I'm going to have to say, FrankenMech yes, conversions no.


18, a LAM must be able to use neither Narrow Design Quirk nor Low Profile Design Quirk because of its aero structure in addition to its ‘Mech internal structure.
I would say that should depend on the individual LAM.
19, let's have LAMs rules published in Total Warfare as Standard tournament legal rules for four reasons: first, BattleTech Tactical Handbook Table of Contents page 4 says "The rules for LAMs currently appear in the BattleTech Compendium, making them Level Two rules and legal for tournament play; however, their inclusion as Level Three rules in the Tactical Handbook now makes LAMs illegal for tournament play.” (that implies that LAMs had been legal for tournament play) ; second, like I said, I firmly believe any LAM can be defeated; third, rules for LAMs are more easier to comprehend than rules for DropShips and Airships; and fourth, allowing LAMs in tournaments will attract new players to BT from Alphabet Robot ABC Learning Toys Transforming Toys Robot Letters, GoBots, Gundam, Robotech, Transformers, and other transformable robots, and that means more battleglory for you when you win against said players (usually they're probably new players that like to use LAMs) . I can give you free ideas as to how to defeat LAMs if you ask me for them; and yes, ideas for LAMs, that are posted above, are for free unless any or all of them are officially republished rules. We can make Total Warfare pages available for LAMs rules by removing miniatures kitbashing pages and publishing them as a new booklet called BattleTech Miniatures Kitbashing because miniatures rules aren’t tournament legal, and thus miniatures kitbashing pages therefore don’t belong in Total Warfare Rulebook.

That may happen one day but I'd be against it. TW should be the more basic units. I don't think Aerospace should be in TW either. I agree that LAMs can be defeated but I don't think that's a reason to make them Tournament Legal. I do think that Tournaments can use non tournament items if the game calls for them. I agree room can be made for them but I think weapons that have been made tournament legal should be placed there instead of the miniatures.

eLMsm
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:20 pm

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by eLMsm »

Greetings Riflemech, I agree to your comments that I haven’t quoted.
I don't know but an errata just came out.
Is that a free errata? If yes, then do you have a link to that errata?
I'm guessing these are house rules but I'm having trouble figuring out what pages you're referring to.
Yes, those rules, that I and others posted at this topic are fan rules unless published in an up to date official BT Rulesbook.
What Word of Blake LAM used a Dual Cockpit?
IO p. 105 Spectral LAM, I think.
I wouldn't do this unless you're House Ruling an Automech from Nebula California because it adds another required skill to the pilot. They already spend more time in training learning to use Mechs and ASFs.
Yeah, I thought that the another required skills would make them more balanced gameruleswise.
We've got our own rules for hand-helds. An arm mounted weapon can be designated as handheld and use all the Physical hand-held weapon rules. Ammo using weapons must have 1 ton of ammo accompanying the weapon. They can't use ammo from other bins. So a Wolverine with an AC/5 and ton of ammo in the right arm can designate that a handheld with ammo and drop it or pick it up.
Interesting.
As far as I know, LAMs can use any Jump Jets as long as the follow the rules for them. I'd also stick with heat as put written in IO and the Jump Jet rules. As a House Rule I would allow only 1 or 2 jump jets for Conventional Fighter LAMs. Also LAMs are Tournament Legal because they are more complicated than Standard Units.
I think you meant “LAMs aren’t currently Tournament Legal because they are more complicated than Standard Units. “ .
We don't use a jumpglide. It's either VTOL or WiGE when flying in Airmech mode. We don't do DFA in AirMech either. Their wings are big enough to allow flight so would make DFA more difficult.
Agreed, VTOL or WiGE movement when flying in AirMech mode. Would you agree to an AirMech doing intentional fall with an additional +2 modifier in addition to all other modifiers as basically an AirMech ram DFA like physical attack?
Turn Modes are one of the things about the new LAM rules we really don't like so ignore them. We also use the regular targeting modifiers. Not the aerospace ones for AirMech mode.
My gaming friends and I will probably use those ideas for Turn Modes including 6c.
We use overdrive.

We also use the rules listed in TO for Vehicles when flying in AirMech.
We also have “Speedy Drive” . See jogging movements topic at this forum.
I have no idea where this is from. LAMs can add fuel at 1 ton per crit, each has 80 points of fuel.
11a, IO p. 114 Fuel rules
Obviously a house rule. I wouldn't use it. How much thrust does it provide? Engine rating /50? That would mean a Stinger LAM would actually lose speed. It's Thrust speed is 6/9 now. This would drop the Speeds to 4/6.
Yes, that rule is a fan rule. We’ll still use it, though, but as an option. Provides same thrust. We allow ‘Mechs to each have 12 critical slots per each leg instead of 6 critical slots per each leg because legs are bigger than arms.
So the Tripod would have 3 legs and 1 arm?
Yes, even if it masses less than 105 tons. I was actually thinking of a QuadLAM with one of its legs replaced with an arm, but your idea of a Tripod LAM is interesting.
I'd be against XLs and the like as they're in the side torso so would effect the conversion process. I'd be against large weapons for the same reason. I'd be okay with IS as long as their crits can all be in one location.

I'm okay with any armor as long as all the crits can fit in one location.

What?
XL Engines and the like could function with side torsos converting because the aero structure makes the ‘Mech structure bigger, thus more room for XL Engines and the like. As for internal structure and armor(s) , we disregard that rule that requires same location of critical slots. You’ll have to reread 17a; I explained 17a as best as I could.
Landing gear, include wheels. I don't know where you're getting 4. I'd be okay with moving Torso Landing Gear to the Legs and even removing the Center one to have 1 in each armor as a custom LAM. I'm okay with moving the Head Crit to the Center Torso for a custom LAM. I don't get the rest of what you said about Avionics.
Basically to free up a critical slot from head and/or CT by replacing middle Avionics with two more Avionics.
You want to have LAMs mount VTOL Jet Boosters? Isn't that kind of redundant as they're already mounting Jets (Jump Jets?)
Yes, as an option for more variety of fun with or without usage(s) of Jump Jet(s) .
I would say that should depend on the individual LAM.
Oh, okay.

As for LAMs being Tournament Legal, maybe they could be pseudo Tournament Legal and the same with multihexes Units and multihexes buildings and Airships so as those four types of rules could be in Tactical Operations; perhaps in future times: Tactical Operations rules could each be optional Tournament Legal rules.
Last edited by eLMsm on Tue Jul 20, 2021 5:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.
When do I “retreat” ? Only when I want to re+treat myself to eating cookies here in VT of USA. Here in VT, outside temperatures can get very cold; I suppose my miniatures won’t get overheated, ha ha.

User avatar
Steve Ronin
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 5436
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 2:40 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by Steve Ronin »

Greetings RifleMech!

Query about LAMs: where do they mount the Flux Capacitor?

:mrgreen:
Image

REPLY to RONIN'S RAMBLINGS HERE

Riflemech
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 12:03 am

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by Riflemech »

eLMsm wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 6:46 pm
Greetings Riflemech, I agree to your comments that I haven’t quoted.
I don't know but an errata just came out.
Is that a free errata? If yes, then do you have a link to that errata?
Cool. Thanks.

Here's all the compiled erratas. Anything else is in the forums.

https://bg.battletech.com/errata/

I'm guessing these are house rules but I'm having trouble figuring out what pages you're referring to.
Yes, those rules, that I and others posted at this topic are fan rules unless published in an up to date official BT Rulesbook.
Oh okay. The page numbers were confusing.



What Word of Blake LAM used a Dual Cockpit?
IO p. 105 Spectral LAM, I think.

Spectral just refers to WoB created LAMs. There's three; S-PW-1LAM Pwwka, S-YR-1LAM Yurei, and S-WN-2LAM Waneta. They have small cockpits and the Waneta uses a VDNI Vehicular Direct Neural Interface. The only LAMs I know of that have a "Dual" cockpit are the Clan Jade Falcon Prototypes.



I wouldn't do this unless you're House Ruling an Automech from Nebula California because it adds another required skill to the pilot. They already spend more time in training learning to use Mechs and ASFs.
Yeah, I thought that the another required skills would make them more balanced gameruleswise.
If it works for your game, go for it. I'll stick to what is and house ruling AutoMechs.

We've got our own rules for hand-helds. An arm mounted weapon can be designated as handheld and use all the Physical hand-held weapon rules. Ammo using weapons must have 1 ton of ammo accompanying the weapon. They can't use ammo from other bins. So a Wolverine with an AC/5 and ton of ammo in the right arm can designate that a handheld with ammo and drop it or pick it up.
Interesting.
Thanks. I know TPTB don't want BT compared to Macross but a lot of Mecha anime use hand held guns so there's no reason to make them worse. Plus if it works for physical weapons, why not ranged weapons?



As far as I know, LAMs can use any Jump Jets as long as the follow the rules for them. I'd also stick with heat as put written in IO and the Jump Jet rules. As a House Rule I would allow only 1 or 2 jump jets for Conventional Fighter LAMs. Also LAMs are Tournament Legal because they are more complicated than Standard Units.
I think you meant “LAMs aren’t currently Tournament Legal because they are more complicated than Standard Units. “ .
Correct. Finger fumble.


[
quote] We don't use a jumpglide. It's either VTOL or WiGE when flying in Airmech mode. We don't do DFA in AirMech either. Their wings are big enough to allow flight so would make DFA more difficult.
Agreed, VTOL or WiGE movement when flying in AirMech mode. Would you agree to an AirMech doing intentional fall with an additional +2 modifier in addition to all other modifiers as basically an AirMech ram DFA like physical attack?[/quote]

I would just use the AirMech Ram rules.



Turn Modes are one of the things about the new LAM rules we really don't like so ignore them. We also use the regular targeting modifiers. Not the aerospace ones for AirMech mode.
My gaming friends and I will probably use those ideas for Turn Modes including 6c.
If you like Turn Modes and the legal AirMech targeting mods. That's cool. We just think they're intentional nerfs against the LAM.

We use overdrive.

We also use the rules listed in TO for Vehicles when flying in AirMech.
We also have “Speedy Drive” . See jogging movements topic at this forum.
ok?

I have no idea where this is from. LAMs can add fuel at 1 ton per crit, each has 80 points of fuel.
11a, IO p. 114 Fuel rules
Doesn't say that. You get 80 points of fuel as part of the conversion equipment. Each 80 points of fuel is 1 ton and 1 crit each. It doesn't talk about fuel pumps and there's no minimum fuel requirement.

Obviously a house rule. I wouldn't use it. How much thrust does it provide? Engine rating /50? That would mean a Stinger LAM would actually lose speed. It's Thrust speed is 6/9 now. This would drop the Speeds to 4/6.
Yes, that rule is a fan rule. We’ll still use it, though, but as an option. Provides same thrust. We allow ‘Mechs to each have 12 critical slots per each leg instead of 6 critical slots per each leg because legs are bigger than arms.
Engine rating /50 doesn't provide the same thrust.
Interesting on the leg crits
So the Tripod would have 3 legs and 1 arm?
Yes, even if it masses less than 105 tons. I was actually thinking of a QuadLAM with one of its legs replaced with an arm, but your idea of a Tripod LAM is interesting.
Okay. I don't know why you wouldn't want two arms but whatever. I'm okay with armless mechs too. Would the arm be on the right or left?
I'd be against XLs and the like as they're in the side torso so would effect the conversion process. I'd be against large weapons for the same reason. I'd be okay with IS as long as their crits can all be in one location.

I'm okay with any armor as long as all the crits can fit in one location.

What?
XL Engines and the like could function with side torsos converting because the aero structure makes the ‘Mech structure bigger, thus more room for XL Engines and the like. As for internal structure and armor(s) , we disregard that rule that requires same location of critical slots. You’ll have to reread 17a; I explained 17a as best as I could.
I read it and didn't understand it.
Wouldn't the larger structure invalidate the narrow/compact Mech Quirk?
Part of the side torso is converting to a wing. How can it do that with an item that can't move?

Landing gear, include wheels. I don't know where you're getting 4. I'd be okay with moving Torso Landing Gear to the Legs and even removing the Center one to have 1 in each armor as a custom LAM. I'm okay with moving the Head Crit to the Center Torso for a custom LAM. I don't get the rest of what you said about Avionics.
Basically to free up a critical slot from head and/or CT by replacing middle Avionics with two more Avionics.
I'm okay with moving the head avionics crit to the CT. I'm even okay going without it as long as the penalties are included.


You want to have LAMs mount VTOL Jet Boosters? Isn't that kind of redundant as they're already mounting Jets (Jump Jets?)
Yes, as an option for more variety of fun with or without usage(s) of Jump Jet(s) .
I still don't get it. There's Max Thrust in FighterMode (STx2) and you're using Overdrive in AirMech Mode which would be Cruising x2). What would the Jet boosters do?



As for LAMs being Tournament Legal, maybe they could be pseudo Tournament Legal and the same with multihexes Units and multihexes buildings and Airships so as those four types of rules could be in Tactical Operations; perhaps in future times: Tactical Operations rules could each be optional Tournament Legal rules.

If the Tournament calls for any of that stuff it'd be used. I do wish TPTB had organized the books differently. They're a mess and only getting worse.

eLMsm
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:20 pm

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by eLMsm »

Greetings RifleMech, I read any parts, of your most recent reply, that I didn’t quote.

Thanks for that link to errata.

We use Turn Modes because they seem to make AirMechs more realistic.

jogging movements topic:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18951
Doesn't say that. You get 80 points of fuel as part of the conversion equipment. Each 80 points of fuel is 1 ton and 1 crit each. It doesn't talk about fuel pumps and there's no minimum fuel requirement.
If I remember correctly, Strategic Operations requires 2% for fuel pumps. For a 200 tons or less massive Unit, I actually have 78 points of fuel plus the 2% fuel pumps for each full ton because that’s easier math and easier designing.
Engine rating /50 doesn't provide the same thrust.
The number of critical slots, that the combustion chambers consume, equals engine rating divided by 50. Same thrust provided in the combustion chambers; exhaust goes out of combustion chambers’ exhaust nozzles.
Okay. I don't know why you wouldn't want two arms but whatever. I'm okay with armless mechs too. Would the arm be on the right or left?
Character, that is designing LAM, makes that choice.
I read it and didn't understand it.
Wouldn't the larger structure invalidate the narrow/compact Mech Quirk?
Part of the side torso is converting to a wing. How can it do that with an item that can't move?
Larger structure would most likely invalidate that Quirk. The Aerostructure wings expand around the XL engine.

What is your opinion of replacing Avionics in Head with a Neck Actuator?

search.php?keywords=%2B+neck+%2B+actuat ... mit=Search

Jet Boosters provide additional AirMech flight MPs as if it was a VTOL or WiGE. I suppose Jet Boosters could be used in BattleMech mode but with a Piloting Skill Roll with a modifier equal to LAM’s current attacker movement modifier in addition to all other modifiers; make that PSR per each hex entered and when LAM is required to make a PSR. Jet Boosters could also be used by a LAM in Conventional/Aerospace Fighter mode in low atmosphere for more speed in addition to thrusting.

I have ideas for reorganizing BT Rulesbooks so they’re not a mess:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19006

Alpha Strike could be its own Rulesbook, so could BattleForce, and so could the abstract rules, that are currently in IO.
When do I “retreat” ? Only when I want to re+treat myself to eating cookies here in VT of USA. Here in VT, outside temperatures can get very cold; I suppose my miniatures won’t get overheated, ha ha.

Riflemech
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 12:03 am

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by Riflemech »

eLMsm wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 7:51 pm
Greetings RifleMech, I read any parts, of your most recent reply, that I didn’t quote.

Thanks for that link to errata.

We use Turn Modes because they seem to make AirMechs more realistic.
Hi :)

You're welcome.

That's cool. I'm not against Turn Modes. I'm against them being forced only on AirMechs. I think if they're going to be in play, they should be used by all units.


jogging movements topic:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18951
Interesting

Doesn't say that. You get 80 points of fuel as part of the conversion equipment. Each 80 points of fuel is 1 ton and 1 crit each. It doesn't talk about fuel pumps and there's no minimum fuel requirement.
If I remember correctly, Strategic Operations requires 2% for fuel pumps. For a 200 tons or less massive Unit, I actually have 78 points of fuel plus the 2% fuel pumps for each full ton because that’s easier math and easier designing.
The construction rules in Strategic Operations applies only to Space Stations, Jumpships, and Warships. It doesn't apply to other units. However, TechManual has the same rule for Small Craft and Dropships. It's also an additional tonnage. 5 tons of fuel would have .5 tons of fuel pumps. .2% of total fuel rounded to nearest half ton.

LAM construction rules are in Interstellar Operations. They don't have the 2% for fuel pumps.


Engine rating /50 doesn't provide the same thrust.
The number of critical slots, that the combustion chambers consume, equals engine rating divided by 50. Same thrust provided in the combustion chambers; exhaust goes out of combustion chambers’ exhaust nozzles.

That means LAMs wouldn't have a thrust rating greater than 6/9.




Okay. I don't know why you wouldn't want two arms but whatever. I'm okay with armless mechs too. Would the arm be on the right or left?
Character, that is designing LAM, makes that choice.
That's cool.

I read it and didn't understand it.
Wouldn't the larger structure invalidate the narrow/compact Mech Quirk?
Part of the side torso is converting to a wing. How can it do that with an item that can't move?
Larger structure would most likely invalidate that Quirk. The Aerostructure wings expand around the XL engine.
I don't see how wings can expand around the engines. The engines would always have to be covered.

What is your opinion of replacing Avionics in Head with a Neck Actuator?
I think a neck actuator should go in the center torso since it'd make the head into a head turret. I also think a full head ejection system should take a slot in the head but it doesn't, so I think a "neck actuator" would probably end up as a quirk.

search.php?keywords=%2B+neck+%2B+actuat ... mit=Search

Jet Boosters provide additional AirMech flight MPs as if it was a VTOL or WiGE. I suppose Jet Boosters could be used in BattleMech mode but with a Piloting Skill Roll with a modifier equal to LAM’s current attacker movement modifier in addition to all other modifiers; make that PSR per each hex entered and when LAM is required to make a PSR. Jet Boosters could also be used by a LAM in Conventional/Aerospace Fighter mode in low atmosphere for more speed in addition to thrusting.
So the Jet Boosters would be to the AirMech, what MASC, and Super Chargers are to Mechs? That might be okay. If used in Fighter Mode, I'd say it'd double the safe thrust so that max thrust would be 2.5 x thrust. It would need to be careful not to go too fast and cause structural damage though. If used in MechMode, I'd say with standard JJs it could jump up to it's running speed. With IJJs double it's walking speed.


I have ideas for reorganizing BT Rulesbooks so they’re not a mess:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19006

Alpha Strike could be its own Rulesbook, so could BattleForce, and so could the abstract rules, that are currently in IO.
Alpha Strike is it's own rule book and I think they made BattleForce into it's own book too. Same with BattleSpace.

I would definitely move things around.

eLMsm
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:20 pm

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by eLMsm »

Hi RifleMech!

I agree that some other units, along with AirMechs, must use Turn Modes.

I don’t require each combustion chamber critical slot to be limited to only one thrust point per turn.

The wings expand around engines with the side torsos’ aerostructures expanding around said engine like an accordion expanding around a box inside said accordion.

Some ‘Mechs couldn’t do headbunting attacks if Neck Actuator has to be in CT instead of lower Sensors critical slot because some ‘Mechs each wouldn’t have a critical slot in CT for Neck Actuator.
So the Jet Boosters would be to the AirMech, what MASC, and Super Chargers are to Mechs? That might be okay. If used in Fighter Mode, I'd say it'd double the safe thrust so that max thrust would be 2.5 x thrust. It would need to be careful not to go too fast and cause structural damage though. If used in MechMode, I'd say with standard JJs it could jump up to it's running speed. With IJJs double it's walking speed.
Yes, Jet Boosters would be to AirMech as MASC and Superchargers are to ‘Mechs, but Jet Boosters don’t provide more thrust, but they can provide additional hex movements flight directionally proportionally to LAM as if it was in AirMech mode. I like your ideas for ‘Mechs & Jet Boosters and JJs and IJJs.
When do I “retreat” ? Only when I want to re+treat myself to eating cookies here in VT of USA. Here in VT, outside temperatures can get very cold; I suppose my miniatures won’t get overheated, ha ha.

Riflemech
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2021 12:03 am

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by Riflemech »

eLMsm wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:37 pm
Hi RifleMech!

I agree that some other units, along with AirMechs, must use Turn Modes.
To me it's all or none. The slowest legal AirMech is 9/14. 6/9 if it's lost a JJ. There's a lot of units that fast or faster. Even the fastest AirMechs are being outrun by Mechs with advanced equipment. So I think if AirMechs have to use Turn Modes, all units should use Turn Modes.

I don’t require each combustion chamber critical slot to be limited to only one thrust point per turn.
What?

The wings expand around engines with the side torsos’ aerostructures expanding around said engine like an accordion expanding around a box inside said accordion.
What? I can see that for the wings but the engine needs to be protected at all times.

Some ‘Mechs couldn’t do headbunting attacks if Neck Actuator has to be in CT instead of lower Sensors critical slot because some ‘Mechs each wouldn’t have a critical slot in CT for Neck Actuator.
Do you mean headbutt attack? If so, what headbutt attack? Is that some other house rule? A Headbutt involves more than just the neck. It's the whole body. Even if it were possible, what pilot would risk killing himself doing it?

As for the sentence, what?

So the Jet Boosters would be to the AirMech, what MASC, and Super Chargers are to Mechs? That might be okay. If used in Fighter Mode, I'd say it'd double the safe thrust so that max thrust would be 2.5 x thrust. It would need to be careful not to go too fast and cause structural damage though. If used in MechMode, I'd say with standard JJs it could jump up to it's running speed. With IJJs double it's walking speed.
Yes, Jet Boosters would be to AirMech as MASC and Superchargers are to ‘Mechs, but Jet Boosters don’t provide more thrust, but they can provide additional hex movements flight directionally proportionally to LAM as if it was in AirMech mode. I like your ideas for ‘Mechs & Jet Boosters and JJs and IJJs.
What? If Jet Boosters = VTOL Boosters then the AirMech's Cruising MP is doubled when they're on. So in Fighter Mode, Safe Thrust MP should also be doubled.
Thanks

User avatar
Steve Ronin
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 5436
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 2:40 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by Steve Ronin »

eLMsm has lots of wildly creative ideas....and a very creative use of english grammar.

half the adventure is figuring out what eLMsm is trying to say. :)

sometimes the typing fingers cannot keep up with the ideas pouring out of the brain.

but eLMsm, RifleMech is correct: a headbutt attack would crush the cockpit and kill the pilot. (unless the Mech is using a torso cockpit)
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Torso_Cockpit
Image

REPLY to RONIN'S RAMBLINGS HERE

eLMsm
BTU Rank
BTU Rank
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:20 pm

Re: LAMs old issues and how did you fix them?

Post by eLMsm »

Greetings RifleMech,

Physics lecture: a ‘Mech or Battle Armor or ProtoMech or Feet Infantry, that is Walking/Jogging/Running Sprinting, shouldn’t really need Turn Modes because they can rotate their feet easily agile sufficiently without the need for Turn Modes.

Basically, I allow a Combustion Chamber critical slot to provide multiple thrust points per turn. When you replied 6/9, I thought you meant 450 rated engine divided by 50 = 9 to reply that a LAM could only have those maximums; that wasn’t my intention.

The LAM’s engine is protected when the LAM converts from BattleMech mode to AirMech mode to Aerospace Fighter mode because the four side torsos wings expand (slide) around the engine like an accordion sliding (expanding) around a box inside said accordion.

Yes, headbutt attack. I taptyped headbunting attack because it seemed to be more appropriate wording. Such an attack would be sort of like (but does less damage than) a punch attack. That’s why no damage to Head Armor when doing headbunting attack. But I don’t think an AirMech could do a headbunting attack. Which sentence are you asking about?

I don’t think Jet Boosters can use Aerospace Fighter fuel.

Greetings Steve Ronin,
Thanks for the compliments. Yeah, I use much technical communicating. I do theorize an armored Head used to do headbunting attack wouldn’t damage that Head or ‘Mech Pilot inside that Head, though (see above) .
When do I “retreat” ? Only when I want to re+treat myself to eating cookies here in VT of USA. Here in VT, outside temperatures can get very cold; I suppose my miniatures won’t get overheated, ha ha.