|
|
|
Mordel's Bar & Grill |
|
  |
» |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Raven!
Clan Snow Raven
Galaxy Commander
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1326
Location: United States
|
 Posted: 01-Dec-2003 22:23 Post subject: Conventional Fighters |
  |
|
Hey all. I've been sitting here thinking of ways that in a 3025 game could lead to weaker nations defending themselves against large evil powerful people.
And I came up with the idea of having Rocket Launchers, but calling them Bomb Clusters. Ultra short range, unguided, and you target hexes and they can only be used by fighters and VTOLs.
Build some cheap conventional fighters, arm them with these little Bomb Clusters, and send them out after the enemy. Then I came up with the cool idea of actually having some kind of mobile HQ in a huge conventional fighter and so I heavily modified a planetlifter.
So my question is, how many of you use Conventional Fighters, how many would be interested in seeing my bomb clusters, and the designs I made?
Raven, always curious about the forgotten parts of BattleTech!
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
Paul
Capellan Confederation
Sang-wei
Joined: 25-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 255
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 01-Dec-2003 22:31 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
IMO the way conventional fighters are designed compared to ASF is an even greater slant than comparing vehicles to Mechs.
At least vehicles can give Mechs a run for their money; you need quite a bit of conventional fighter volume (be it mass or numbers) to equalize ASFs.
Which makes them interesting to play with when I need a challenge, but otherwise it's pretty much always better to go with ASF.
Fluff wise they have a big place among militia units, who'd jump at any cheap way to increase their firepower. But in that instance only as close air support; barring some exceptions you'd usually get your ass kicked trying to maintain air superiority against a force supported with ASF. I consider instances where the conventional force can be expected to be large enough to defeat an ASF force rare exceptions, fluff wise.
Not impossible, it just doesn't happen a lot.
Eitherway, lay those rules on me.
Paul
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Raven!
Clan Snow Raven
Galaxy Commander
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1326
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 01-Dec-2003 22:48 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
Well my reasoning behind the CF is that ASF forces are very limited, especially in 3025. And the chances of people having any when they arrive on planet are slim to none. Knowing that, and also knowing that the simple construction of ASF could make them produced on a wide variety of worlds that only have light industry inspired me to come up with the idea. The Bomb Clusters are single shot but pack a serious punch:
BC05 0.25 tons
BC10 0.50 tons
BC15 0.75 tons
BC20 1.00 tons
Damage: 1/BC
Range: 1/2/3
Crits: 1
Heat: 0
Roll to attack a hex. BC can only be delivered through Dive Bombing. range gives you a bit of flexability and just shows how you can arch the bombs falling.
Roll on the missile hit chart to determine how many bombs effect each target in the hex. If their are two targets roll on the chart twice. Once for the first target, and once for the second target. Misses scatter as per bombing rules.
These are one shot weapons.
Raven!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Paul
Capellan Confederation
Sang-wei
Joined: 25-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 255
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 01-Dec-2003 22:57 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2003-12-01 22:48, Raven! wrote:
Well my reasoning behind the CF is that ASF forces are very limited, especially in 3025. And the chances of people having any when they arrive on planet are slim to none.
|
|
Oh, I don't know about that. Most Unions and Overlords tend to have fighter escorts, the number of which can increase drastically depending how a regiment chooses to move.
That said, I would agree that it's equally likely that some units dont even deploy kites as aircover.
Quote:
|
Knowing that, and also knowing that the simple construction of ASF could make them produced on a wide variety of worlds that only have light industry inspired me to come up with the idea.
|
|
It seems to me that the relative leap from CF to ASF is small. But then, that segment seems less well documented than the amounts by which Mechs and vehicles are produced.
(Or rather, I don;t know about it)
Quote:
|
The Bomb Clusters are single shot but pack a serious punch:
BC05 0.25 tons
BC10 0.50 tons
BC15 0.75 tons
BC20 1.00 tons
|
|
Seems a bit light. How does this compare to canon bombs?
Quote:
|
Damage: 1/BC
Range: 1/2/3
Crits: 1
Heat: 0
Roll to attack a hex. BC can only be delivered through Dive Bombing. range gives you a bit of flexability and just shows how you can arch the bombs falling.
|
|
I see. Shouldn't the ranges then be 0/1/2, which would result in a +0 range modifier if you arc the bombs in to your target hex, +2 if you want to aim 1 hex off, and +4 if you're aiming 4 off?
Also, when you aim for a hex, do you get a -4 to-hit? If so, perhaps apply a penalty to the missile table roll to indicate the lack of guidance compared to a flight of LRMs, for instance?
Quote:
|
Roll on the missile hit chart to determine how many bombs effect each target in the hex. If their are two targets roll on the chart twice. Once for the first target, and once for the second target. Misses scatter as per bombing rules.
|
|
What if there are 3 targets?
And how are misses defined? I aim for a hex, strike it, roll on the missile table for the single Mech in that hex, do 12 damage, then scatter 1 8 point attack? Would that attack be resolved on a missile table again? Would it scatter the second time?
Other than that, interesting. Whats the main difference with existing bombs though?
Paul
|
|
| Back to top |
|
-Mud
ex-Jade Falcon
Bounty Hunter
Joined: 04-Nov-2003 00:00
Posts: 1082
|
| Posted: 01-Dec-2003 23:18 Post subject: Aerotech force levels and Deployment |
|
|
Just how rare are true aerospace assets in 3025, anyway? To my knowledge, FASA never directly addressed this issue, but it is possible to extrapolate a rough estimate. Technically, there is supposed to be one air lance (two fighters) per company, although in most cases these fighters are detatched and assigned at either the regimental level, or more commonly, brigade or divisional level. Assuming only two aerospace fighters exist per twelve 'mechs, that's only 18 per regiment, which computes to a total force value of only 20% of total 'mech forces. Given there are probably between 500 to 600 regiments worth of functional battlemechs in the Inner Sphere (approx. 100 per house on average, including Mercenary and Pirate units), or approximately 54,000-64,800 individual functional Battlemechs, there could only be around 10,000 Aerospace Fighters overall, or only 2,000 true Aerospace fighters per house, on average. Several factors could account for the disparity, given true Aerospace fighters are as difficult for the Successor Houses to design and build 'mechs, and Aerospace fighter production is severly limited. It can be argued that these calculations only take into account aerospace forces assigned to ground support, but the common practice of detatching aerospace forces from ground units, and forming them into larger airborne formations, suggests otherwise. It seems that the Successor Lords have run through the majority of their Aerospace assets, and are reduced to scrounging up the ground support units in order to maintain adequate air fleets for space escort and superiority duty.
Generally, Aerospace fighters are more difficult to salvage than 'mechs or vehicles. During the course of battle in deep space, crippled fighters would often not be recovered, because their built up velocity would carry them beyond effective salvage range, often before the battle was even over. Limited fuel supplies would prevent Dropships or fighters from straying too far from their predetermined course from Jumppoint to planet. Second, fighters shot down in the atmosphere will often be damaged beyond repair on impact. Finally, fighters are more fragile that 'mechs, especially in the atmosphere, where a myriad of control hits can send a fighter crashing to the ground. As a result, the base lf salvagable parts which supports the 'mech regiments simply does not exist for Aerospace forces.
This relative scarcity of true Aerospace assets would greatly effect deployment. Aerospace fighters are absolutely essential to effective offensive action. Without an Aerospace fighter escort, troop carrying Dropships could easily be destroyed in space by relatively few defending fighters. Therefore, the Great Houses would carefully husband their Aerospace assets, and not commit them casually in raids or counter-insurgency actions. Additionally, due to the added danger of operations in the atmosphere, fighters which are actually deployed as part of a raiding force may only undertake screening operations in space, and provide cover for the 'mech forces during the drop operations. Remember, it only takes one lucky infantryman with a shoulder SRM launcher to bring that fighter down.
In light of the scarcity of aerospace fighters, and the general reluctance to deploy them in low-intensity warfare, conventional fighters become exponentially more important. The air-to-air element of the equation is equalized, and conventional fighters are almost as effective in the ground support role as Aerospace fighters. There is plenty of room for designers here as well, given the paucity of official conventional fighter designs.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
-Mud
ex-Jade Falcon
Bounty Hunter
Joined: 04-Nov-2003 00:00
Posts: 1082
|
| Posted: 01-Dec-2003 23:21 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
| Not bad; internal bomb bays could serve much the same purpose.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Motown Scrapper
Clan Ice Hellions
Galaxy Commander
Joined: 24-Jul-2003 00:00
Posts: 2074
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-Dec-2003 01:51 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
I have a number of conventional fighter designs most are at the low end of the scale where they have an edge in weight since the control tonage is 10% of the aircrafts weight while the ASF uses a three ton cockpit reguardless of size while ASF have an edge in armour conventional fighters have an edge in manouverablity,and can be built smaller than ASF.and if they use fusion engines they canuse energy weapons and DHS.So they can be nasty dog fighters in atmospheric combat.
_________________
Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have-Rush Limbaugh www.rushlimbaugh.com
Force of nature
Still crazy after all these years
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Raven!
Clan Snow Raven
Galaxy Commander
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1326
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-Dec-2003 08:52 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
I'm going to try to answer some of what you have asked here.
[quote]
Seems a bit light. How does this compare to canon bombs?
[/quote]
Canon bombs are 1 for every five tons, mounted externally. Which means you can still carry a full load of other weapons. This reduces that. However, they aren't as powerful, cause a Canon HE bomb will automatically do 10 damage to every unit in the hex, and a cluster will do five damage to every unit, and five damage to every unit in the surrounding 6 hexes. Thats fairly powerful.
[quote]
I see. Shouldn't the ranges then be 0/1/2, which would result in a +0 range modifier if you arc the bombs in to your target hex, +2 if you want to aim 1 hex off, and +4 if you're aiming 4 off?
Also, when you aim for a hex, do you get a -4 to-hit? If so, perhaps apply a penalty to the missile table roll to indicate the lack of guidance compared to a flight of LRMs, for instance?
[/quote]
About Range, feel free. These are very basic rules right now so i'm happy to change that  and it makes sense!
Your second part of the question: no. there is no -4 to hit the target hex. It is a dive bombing attack only, so the base to hit is automatically 6 for the first cluster launched, and a cumaltive (sp?) +1 to hit for each additional bomb cluster. If you are aiming your maximum range you're adding a +4 to hit. This is also where it balances out.
A penalty to the Missile Hit chart would be fine by me, but if you hit the hex (not a scatter roll) you always do at least minimil damage. Now, if you scatter the bomb, and it goes off in a random direction and hits a hex with a Mech in it, and you roll to see how many missiles hit and you roll a 4 which becomes a 0 nothing hits.
[quote]
What if there are 3 targets?
And how are misses defined? I aim for a hex, strike it, roll on the missile table for the single Mech in that hex, do 12 damage, then scatter 1 8 point attack? Would that attack be resolved on a missile table again? Would it scatter the second time?
[/quote]
Misses are defined as failing to hit the target hex. If you hit, but only two bombs do damage (due to the missile chart) you don't get to roll and see where the other bombs went. This is a 30 meter hex, aimed at something which is tall, but not that wide. Chances are the bombs can land around the mech and not hit it. However, the bomb shells do have a fairly big explosion, cause they cannot depend on penetration to do damage, so if two units are in the hex, one might be affected by more bombs then another.
So we have three tanks in a hex. Tank 1 Tank 2 and Tank 3. you drop a 20 point bomb cluster at the tank. You roll to hit and you hit the hex, the bombs are now falling on top of the tanks. You have to roll three times on the Missile Hit table. The first time you get a 12, so tank 1 takes 12 points of damage divided into two five point clusters, and one two point cluster. Those 12 bombs were close enough to do damage.
Tank 2 also takes 12. It was near Tank 1 perhaps, and 12 bombs fell in between them.
Tank 3, on the other hand, only takes 6 damage cause he was far enough back that he only got hit by the tale end of the bombs.
does this make sense? its an area of effect/saturation weapon.
[quote]
Other than that, interesting. Whats the main difference with existing bombs though?
[/quote]
Canon Bombs are big huge pieces of equipment which can do terrible amounts of damage. You can only carry a limited amount and the day of the Bomber is gone with them. These allow you to do damage, but also are limited with actual tonnage, penalties to hit, and reduction of damage so even the most powerful cluster is only about as strong as a normal HE bomb.
In other words, I'd say they are about equal, with a fighter with an all Cluster lay out having a slight advantage (until fighting started )
Raven!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Jade_Dragon
8th Sword of Light
Sho-sho
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1325
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-Dec-2003 11:11 Post subject: RE: Aerotech force levels and Deployment |
|
|
I woud give each successor house a few more ASF assets than that, as there should be a few non ground support fighters left and I would have to assume there were a few left from each of the naval branches of their militaries.
However, the ASF situation does seem to be rather bad, worse than that of the limited 'Mechs. Why we have not seen more conventional designs is a good solid question.
_________________
The JadeDragon
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Raven!
Clan Snow Raven
Galaxy Commander
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1326
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-Dec-2003 11:23 Post subject: RE: Aerotech force levels and Deployment |
|
|
And one that I will attempt to answer in the Design Submitions post!
Raven!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Oafman
Draconis Combine
Tai-sho
Joined: 18-Nov-2003 00:00
Posts: 1657
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-Dec-2003 13:20 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
If you are heading in the direction of carpet bombing, then why not use the WWII and Vietnam tactics of having a squadron of bombers with a small fighter escort. That way the bombers can carry a full load without having to worry about loading up with air to air weapons. After the bombs are dropped then you would still have the fighters to keep the air clean.
(having strange pictures of Locusts being attacked by P51 mustangs.) If they could kill heavy trains in Africa and Germany why not use them against lights?
_________________
Festina Lente!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Raven!
Clan Snow Raven
Galaxy Commander
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1326
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-Dec-2003 14:24 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
actually that could work, but fighter bombers work better, because you have a lot more control of where you go. In lance on lance engagements, carpet bombing doesn't work. However, during Operation Bulldog I can think of a number of times carpet bombing would have been a damn nice addition.
Raven!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Oafman
Draconis Combine
Tai-sho
Joined: 18-Nov-2003 00:00
Posts: 1657
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-Dec-2003 17:10 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
That is what I was thinking more of. For certain campaigns against mixed targets carpet bombing would be great fun. Especially in an urban setting. Nothing like knocking buildings over on top of a couple hundred infantry.
_________________
Festina Lente!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
-Mud
ex-Jade Falcon
Bounty Hunter
Joined: 04-Nov-2003 00:00
Posts: 1082
|
| Posted: 02-Dec-2003 22:44 Post subject: RE: Conventional Fighters |
|
|
| All of this forgets a crucial fact; Dropship carrying space and Jumpship capacity is extremely limited. No House, Clan, or other faction has the transport assets to deliver wings of conventional fighters to the battlefield; thus, conventional fighters are for the most part destined to play a defensive or counter-insurgency role.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
-Mud
ex-Jade Falcon
Bounty Hunter
Joined: 04-Nov-2003 00:00
Posts: 1082
|
| Posted: 02-Dec-2003 22:47 Post subject: RE: Aerotech force levels and Deployment |
|
|
| What about Dropship and Jumpship assets? Does anybody have any kind of reliable numbers for these ships? Personally, I can think of no means of extrapolating a figure from the information given in the sources as I did with fighters. One could calculate the numbers required to lift all of the listed 'mech regiments in the Inner Sphere, but as many regiments lack intregral Dropship transport, this would not yield a reliable number. Additionally, there is no way of knowing what percentage of regiments have intregal Dropship or Jumpship capability. I would imagine the numbers would be pretty limited, however.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| |
» |
All times are GMT-05:00 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
