The most difficult thing to accept with charge is that it is the mech attack with the greatest range, and this is unacceptable.

This is why I voted to reduce charge range. Mechs can still run 2x move and base something, but not charge it.

Long distance charge was needed to beat a turtle army early in the game, but now we have VTOLs and artillery, and turtles are not so much of a problem.

I would not vote for reducing charge damage, but I would vote for INCREASING damage to the charger. For instance if a Locust charges an Atlas, it may do a few clicks, but it will get severely damaged in the process.

I voted for reducing the charge range to the printed speed of a unit because of all the proposed options that one does the most to fix charging relative to other combat options.

If the range is reduced then even a locust has to sit inside the ranged attack range of many units for at leasty a turn before it can attempt to charge. That's a turn where it can take fire or have the likely target move to avoid the charge.

It also means that if a unit wants to charge on the next turn its going to have to push so that's at least two heat (three if its a non-evade unit) its going to be building up. If it had not completely cleared before moving into range that's four heat its going to have taken.

For most mechs 3-4 clicks of heat is going to be some serious heat effect rolls and even if they succeed a single energy hit next turn could lead to either more heat rolls or send the unit into auto-shutdown, making it dead meat. Even if no one tries to overheat the charging mech it will almost certainly have to vent next turn due to heat.

Thus, charging becomes a daring tactic where you either have to set it up carefully (ex. driving opponents into your unit's charge range with artillary so you can charge with minimum heat build up) or attempt it out of shear desperation (you've just been salvaged and have nothing to lose by overheating).

Another related factor is that by reducing the charge range you completely eliminate the first turn infiltrate charge. Even with the nerf to infiltration, a BR Lego can infiltrate 10 inches in and then charge for 20 inches more. Then add in the extra inch that its base extends and unless you are a vehicle backed sideways against the rear of your deployment zone you could potentially be charged by it on the first turn of the game (my "favorite" was a guy who took three of them in a single 600 point match (the one between the SC and SW where you could sink through the ice and sent all three charging into my mechs on his first turn and crippled two of them before I even got an order in the game).

Reducing charging to x1 movement is by far the best choice, though admittedly it will have to come hand in hand with a requisite nerf to tank drop. The current problem with charge is just how much of the board it can cover with the potential for big damage, making people unwilling to move likely charge targets forward (or field them at all).

LOS is a decent enough solution, as it will make terrain placement a more key element, but this robs Mechs of their attack that can go around terrain while leaving VTOLs and Arty able to -- making those units more attractive when they're already attractive enough.

I don't like the +2 defense because Mechs need a viable move and attack option. Making charges as difficult to do as a DFA is just going to make charging as common as a DFA -- we want to weaken charge, not get rid of it. This attack should still be able to do big damage and have a valid payoff, thus I don't like the reduced damage... However, if a Mech has the chance to shoot at a charger before getting shot, then charge is balanced as a viable big attack.

Extra heat is also a bad idea -- it makes it likely that you're just trading your mech for your opponents, thus effectively killing charge. Again, we want to weaken it, not kill it.

Lastly, reducing armor is a bad, bad idea because low damage armies or armies that have lost their ArP ability through damage needs to retain a viable ArP ability -- charge. That's why charge ignores armor in the first place, to keep hardened armor units from being unstoppable. (Not that I would mind, being an HL player. :grin: )

x1 Movement fixes a flaw in the game's logic as well as in it's gameplay -- I'll no longer have to show new players that a mech can charge from outside another mech's long-distance weapon range, something that inevitably raises a comment of "that's stupid" from new players. For those worried about turtle armies being helped by x1 charge fix -- that's what VTOLs and arty are for -- anti-turtling. And really, I don't think tankdrop would be helped all that much by this because a maxim is so much less maneuverable than a mech -- much easier for support forces to keep busy than Mechs like Arnis (it's always bothered me when people say "Arnis isn't a problem -- just base him". I'm an Arnis player and my Arnis has NEVER been based unless I've decided to LET him be based... But keeping a Maxim busy, grappledrop based or blocked is much easier). With x1 movement, Mechs retain a viable big "move and shoot" tactic, it'll just be more reasonably ranged and allow for more manuevering.

I agree that without 2x charge distance tank drop will be more effective than it has been.

The balance of tank drop vs. charge should be considered when making the change.

I don't think tank drop is as "broken" as some claim, but this should be taken into consideration when playtesting a change.

Thanks for the poll! AWESOME!

For those that don't like the idea of armor reducing charge damage.

Does armor reduce close combat damage?

I can see DFA's ignoring armor but if a punch doesn't why should a shoulder charge?

If ALL charges do 3 base (with bonuses for Brawling and Primary Melee) then it will still do damage to those with Heavy and Hardened armor regardless. Heck, this way a salavaged mech would still hurt a healthy Atlas on a good roll.

But I do agree with reduciing the Charge range to x1 move. No bonuses to DV unless you have Evade or Camo (in Hindering).

I agree that charging is a problem and needs corrected to maintain game balance. I also feel that any changes that are made need to be kept simple. Here is what I would like to propose as a fix to charging.

Charge remains a special action and still ignores armor SE. If we have charging damage reduced by armor we take away from mechs whose point cost was calculated with agility.

To charge a mech still recieves a run order but only can move its printed value. This will allow the long range mechs to become perhaps more cost efficent as I can think of no mechs with 14+ movement.

The defender gets a +2 to its defence if the LOS from the attacker is blocked. If there is a clear LOS the attack resolves as normal. On a failed attempt the attacker takes a additional click of both heat and damage. This makes failing have a actual penalty instead of have the same effect on your unit as succeding.

In my very humble opinion I think these changes would give charge a much more specific role in the game. The change is also not so drastic as to take away from the game. I would like to hear some comments on this idea. With a well thought out and organized voice to WK perhaps we can get some form of change made.

I don't think charge needs to be changed at all....
The proposed rules will change the dynamic of the game immencely and I think that the 450 pt game size will help balance charge on it's own. Arnis is what everyone seems to hate, but if the standard game turns to 450 pts, Arnis is no longer as destructive. The reason is assault mechs, and other high defence mechs. When a 13 is needed to hit on a charge, I for one don't charge.
I just think we should wait until the new changes have occurred before passing judgement on charge.

Charge does not need be be changed, but a another game mechanic does...

First, make the playing area 4' x 4'.

Then, add the following ruls:

Overfire: All units may make a ranged combat attack over their maximum range (up to 1.5x range) by taking a -2 penalty to their targeting. This attack is considered an indirect ranged combat attack and is therefore subject to a maximum damage of 2. Units with electronic camoflague can not be targeting by this attack.

Underfire: All units may make a ranged combat attack under their minimum range by taking a -2 penalty to their targeting. This attack is considered an indirect ranged combat attack and is therefore subject to a maximum damage of 2. Streak Missile SE may not be used with an Underfire attack.

Now units with high ranges can fire 21" or even 24". Much more realistic... And...Long Tom artillery can use their 48" range!

I'm surprised you didn't put up the option of the defending unit being able to get a free attack, albeit at the cost of 1 heat.

I believe this option would add some extra excitement to the game, yet still keep charging effective as a "last-ditch effort" Imagine charging that Atlas now with the glass jawed Daani Haag!

I think making charges LOS is a no-brainer. No matter what else done to change charging, AT THE VERY LEAST make it LOS only! If someone wants to hide behind blocking terrain, fine, that just makes jump-jets more worth-while.

Being able to charge someone who managed to get into your "blind spot" (rear arc) makes no sense to me at all.

@Izzadragon, some venues, like mine, don't have the option or room to increase to 4' by 4'. I'd almost like the overwatch, but I think the game really needs to reduce the scale of threatened area rather than increase it.

2 damage charges. 15 damage on the dial? 2 damage charges. 0 damage on the dial? 2 damage charges. Brawling SE? +1 damage.

Playtested it extensively RL and everyone seems to like it. Some debate over lessening the penalties for charging 10% or so to balace things out, but that shouldnt be too hard.

I agree 100% with these suggestions. I always thought charge should retain it's AP effects. The +2 defense if not in LOS is interesting and perfectly reasonable to me as well. I mean, if a mech can only run it's walk distance, it could easily maneuver to get it's charge at a target not in LOS (but at a price). But, I could also see removing charge without LOS...Just not sure if I like that idea better...

My only concern left would be how much damage charge does. Assuming the charger is in LOS to defender and is within walk distance, these rules don't change a thing (unless the roll is failed). Perhaps charge should do 1 less dam to defender...and/or 1 more to attacker...(when successful)

Just increasing the risk (i.e. failing a charge) isn't going to make the charge order more "playable". I always like to relate this to a super nuke rule...If I roll 1-3 I vaporize your unit, if I roll 4-6 I vaporize myself. Ya, it's balanced...but, if you aren't thinking to yourself W T F, then go see a doctor :P

Summary: Increase the risk (slightly), and reduce the reward(slightly). And great suggestions!! :)

I Voted for Armor working against charges,Because units like the new longbow and the Rots Black Hawk have hard and heavy armor but low defense values.

I'll elaborate in this way, without insults mind you:
1) The charge rule is fine like it is.
2) No amount of rule changing is going make it better than before.
3) I like the rule as it is. enough said.

4) I'm 1 in 40 people that think this way...

:P