I don't have an abundance of experience here from which to speak, but I have encountered situations where the plan didn't survive contact with the plan before.

Actually in my case, no plan survives contact with vacation.

Quick rules question, do AC/2 Lights and Rapids draw from the same ammo or do you need two bins?

They were like any other ammo using weapon.

Sometimes they work from one bin (like a blackjack), sometimes they draw from separate ones (like a whitworth).

I only asked because they have two different ammo/ton numbers.

oh, you mean are they the same weapon?

no they're not.

AC/2 rapids do not use the same ammo as AC/2 Lights.

It's like saying, do Machine guns and AC/2's share the same ammo bin.

They both do 2 damage, but they're different weapons.

---

For the curious, design justifications for the weapons and ammo usage...

ie...  Roleplaying reason...

The AC/2 rapids were considered a field weapon, and intended to use as a field weapon.  They use the standard Ballistic formula of 100 damage per ton.

The AC?2 lights, were considered a 'hold out' weapon, or a replacement for Machine Guns.  They are notably lighter than the AC/2 rapids and on par with Machine guns.  To reduce the weight to hold out status, or increase the range from machine guns, much of the performance is credited to the non-standard ammo that the AC/2 light uses.  While the cost per ton for an AC/2 light is the same, you get much fewer shots per ton than the AC/2 rapids.

This was not considered an issue for the Omni Engineers because they were considered a reasonable replacement for Machine guns which for the most part were two weapons per ton.  The ammo while reduced was reasonable for two AC/2 lights, it only really became a problem when they were treated as 'main' weapons and more than two ac/2 lights were going to be installed.  Not really a problem for Omni Power loaders who had limited hard points and ample weight displacement for weapons.


ie... Play balance reason...

Machine guns have a obnoxious ammo count that players (before burst MG) were unlikely to ever consume.  So i decided to create an anti mech version of the light MGs as a quick replacement for mechs armed with the MGs.  The justifcation for the greater range was a drastic reduction in ammo.

AC/2 rapids were considered the 'upgunned' version of the weapon for combat and patterned after SRM2s.  Same weight and range, and damage outline as an SRM2.  The notable difference being the reduced cost of the ammo, which was acceptable since they actually got half the use of the ammo.

(a SRM 2 will get fifty shots... an AC/2 rapid triggering two shots will go through the same fifty shots twice as fast.)

Whiile the SRM2 is considered a non popular weapon, the aspect of allowing Ballistic focused characters a light ballistic weapon, was really needed.
This message was last edited by the GM at 11:09, Wed 19 Aug 2015.

And Knowing is Half the Battle.

While the new weapons might seem random with no basis, closer examination or questions to me, will show that there are rules as a basis for most of the stuff i've introduced, and even roleplaying support for.  The exception perhaps being the EW rules, which Battletech really just for the most part ignores.

How goes the battle?

Its a bit Rocky I right now..

No quick knock outs alas.

(Ponders)

It's still early in the reboot process.

If were rebooting the characters, i'm wondering if we should just not work half measure and reboot the campaign with a new premise using the current batch of characters.

Thoughts?

Do you want to finish this story line out or should we start a new one?

New one would fall in one of two directions...

Tauren's, Comstar's direction or Solaris' direction, which was the direction the campaign was going to head once the Omni campaign was wrapped up.

Solaris might be interesting, I'm good either way, though I wish we weren't losing players so much. Seeming like I'll need to find a new XO, for Spectres.

I think my character would fit right in at Solaris.

Well if we go to Solaris, it would be a new format, with 'Stables' and 'Teams' instead of units.

Sounds interesting, I guess BMs would need to likely run multiple teams, without current resources. (Assuming we are talking about smallish teams.)

I actually wanted to do something like a solaris thing, for Mac's website,but couldnt get interest in the concept.

I'm willing to contemplate reviving it for a second try.


matchs are self  played, in that there are only one or two units, so after the initial map, there are no map updates for matches, and you have to track what's happening for yourself.

also, you start playing other players, and it's a duel atmosphere where one, maybe two players match off against each other.

For more than one vs one matches, some one involved should be willing to update maps to keep things straight.

I'm less inclined to do something like that with KittenTech and more inclined to do that with Time of War or Mechwarrior 2nd Ed for easy crossovers.  Solaris is great and all but I look at that more as a backdrop for the events going on in the city in an almost Shadowrun sorta fashion, minus the cyberware of course in pre-Jihad days.  For me I'd want more RPG with some duels otherwise it's just number crunchy 3.5 arena using giant robots...and that is something that I don't want to do.

Yeah, to be honest, I wasn't thinking of only small duels and between players at that. I enjoy the tactics and communications present with lance size units, I personally wouldn't want to lose that.

Mentally I was still thinking the mercenary unit aspect, but in Solaris setting/back drop, seeing more unique op force and equipment, etc. Different fighting conditions, yadda yadda.

In reply to Lucius McMurphy (msg # 266):

I have an abandoned (but not deleted) AToW game here on RPoL that attempted to do exactly what you're describing here, Lucius.  I was planning on running events both in and out of the cockpit but it never really took off.

One of my key points was that players had to be able to update maps on their own so I didn't get bogged down with all the work if the game became popular.

Really if it's only two units on the map you dont have much updating to do, since it's only two units to track, yourself and your opponent.

Regardless i just had my shower and concluded what i'm going to do.

Even if you have the inclination to play out the fall of Omni mission,i really dont have the interest to at this point and time.

My solution is to do for the campaign what i do for missions that have run and in need of being wrapped up, summerize it.

It's not going to be a thoughtless summary though, i'm going to slowly roleplay out the planned events on Omni, and the players will have an opprotunity to discuss and opt what they want to do as things unfold on Omni.

When Omni concludes, we will be 'somewhere', and where that somewhere is, is where we will pick up.  A conservative award will be alloted to the characters, based on the events that occur, and we will continue.

(Points)

New thread being typed up to wrap up the omni campaign, you may answer on it with a character post, or comment here in ooc, with your thoughts on what you should do.

Are we canceling the current m18 than? (I assume yes)

Yes, it's far enough along that i can presume that the outcome is at best a stalemate.

(If you want you can play it out to the bitter end, but it's just not a pretty outcome.)
This message was last edited by the GM at 03:47, Tue 01 Sept 2015.

No thats fine, if were killing the Omni campaign, its probably not worth fully finishing out. Outcome is very hazy, no need to risk major damage or death to members of the lance, when a whole new game is about to spawn essentially.
This message was last edited by the player at 04:00, Tue 01 Sept 2015.

Agreed. Svend is a Solaris pilot anyway. He might just like going back to the pits.

I am really at a loss for what's going on here. Ending the mission/campaign 'early,' I get, but nothing else makes sense. What is Solaris? What kind of changes are we talking about?