Happy New Year to all! (Now back to the topic!)

@ lt_murgen,

We'd already (in the AP thread) pretty much come to the conclusion that a 1.5 Speed rule is pointlessly complex. Yes, I know, for most of us it's a simple matter to calculate, but it's true that it does bog down the game some.

Furthermore, I think you'll find that changing the distances for Charge actually does nothing to really balance it. First off, Evade 'Mechs will still be able to move enough to Charge decisively and take little heat in the process; second, unless tank-drop is changed, lowering the distance for Charge is actually MORE problematic than Impact Damage, since tank-drop would then outrange its (supposed) chief counter, i.e. Charge.

@ Dan43,

Reducing the damage of Charge eliminates MORE 'Mechs from the game. Is that really what you want? Charge is not made useless from drawbacks if the tradeoff is worth it. Lowering the damage inflicted makes it pointless, and I don't think it's a mechanic we want to eliminate...

@ Bahoom,

I'm curious how you can explain a Mechwarrior charging a target he cannot see. Forget the LOS issue - wouldn't he be afraid to run into unseen problems? Penalties for lack of LOS is a very good suggestion for ONE fix - I'd even add you can only charge in a straight line. After all, if your opponent wastes an action putting a vehicle or other 'Mech in your way, he's used up a precious order. Advantage: You.

@ Chris24601,

I see your point about the whole mass-centre of gravity thing. While the issue of how exactly a 'Mech is supposed to charge a tank is beyond us to resolve, think on this: since things don't work exactly as in CBT, one hit in MWDA (potentially) reduces many things - such as Speed. Wouldn't that reflect damage to the legs in a satisfactory way?

Moreover, you said yourself that your version of the rule is intended for a tank-drop environment. But I'm pretty sure I read a post of yours where you mentioned side-basing as an alternative, and it's true! I mean, the Schmitt has ONE weakness, a minimum range of 2. Do we NEED Charge to deal with it?

Also, let's think about the significance of Charge in this case: if tank-drop is such an important threat, would it not warrant a small sacrifice to get rid of it? Of course it would.

So let's take a less-than-ideal Charge 'Mech (i.e. not a Dasher II), say Miguel V. My choices are to get shot by the Schmitt (who WILL hit Defense 18 with 11 IT) or to Charge it. With Impact Damage rules, Miguel would deal 4 points of damage to the Schmitt, reducing it to 3 damage with 8 attack, and knocking out of ALL its SEs. That's a BIG plus. Sure, Miguel is now at 2 damage and 7 attack, but he still has Agility and JJ.

What is the downside, besides the damage? You've now eliminated a MAJOR threat entirely - the tank is damaged out of its good stats, and you're basing it too. Good deal! In exchange, you've used up the better part of a unit 30 points more expensive, this is true. But who was the greater danger in the first place?

I REALLY fail to see how allowing vehicles to have Impact Damage as well is a problem. Heck, I could've used a better 'Mech to Charge, too; it's not like anyone really uses Miguel.

I like the idea - suggested by someone else on another thread - that Charge stays the same except for a failed charge, which deals full primary damage on the failed charger. It would help reduce the attack to desperation or only on already reduced Defense vehicle/Mech.

hakkenshi: I find it hard to believe that changing charge to 1.5x the move value was shot down due to low math skills.

In my opinion, changing the charge range to 1.5x the move value is (while only one part) an excellent way to "correct" charge. Run is still 2x move but not charge...thus you can still "base" tank droppers at insane ranges...just charge them. And with a charge range of 15.x the move value you need only a 10 move to out charge the best mech with a 16" range.

Hakk
I fail to see how reducing the damage from charge takes more mechs out of the game. As it is now you have a lot of mechs that never see play because they will be charged, probably successfully, and will take so much damage that they have no realistic chance to strike back. If they were given a little more defense, damage from charge was dropped by 2 (-1 instead of +1) with a fixed 2 heat for the charger, I think a lot of mechs that do not see play now would come out of the box.

Basing the commonly used tank droppers does nothing. Again, some factions NEED to have charging the drop as an option rather than just allow it to crush something.

Another "fix" that does not take all the implications into account (and this one is a big one IMO)

Ya see...now you are just being difficult. I have previously posted my COMPLETE "fix", this isn't it...just in case you didn't get that.

Like I said...it is only PART of the "fix". And basing a drop IS benificial. A tank can't shoot you if you are in base contact with one of his allies. And in some cases a mech can get within the minimum range of a dropped tank when they base it .

And I am NOT dropping charge altogther. And as you said, some faction NEED charge. And by chaing charge to 1.5x move those factions (DF and SC for two) aren't neutered. They can still move fast enough for Charge to be very effective against the 16" mechs.

You have to realize that everyone here that wants to "fix" charge also wants to "fix" tank drop. So stop thinking we are advocating tank drop by "fixing" charge.

I see the number one excuse used to NOT "fix" charge is it counters tank drop which counters VTOLs, etc...

Sorry...VTOLs are countered by AA. High Minimum ranges on tanks is countered by tank drop.

Tank Drop counters everything...Charge trumps Tank Drop.

Solution? Fix those two tactics. Slow chargers and restrict the damage (auto-AP? YUCK!) while you handicap tank droppers and all is well.

No... it isn't. The maxim breaks on anything but a 1, then drops and blows the offending unit away. At least if you charge it you can force a drop on your terms.

No. The #1 reason to not change charge is because there really is nothing wrong with it.

The #2 reason is because any changes would nerf too many units that were created with charge in mind, while not affecting the best of the best chargers very much at all.

The #3 reason is because having a viable first strike option beyond the effective firing range promotes fluid games that are not just positioning wars and base and break wars.

Move and shoot would alter the dynamics of the game far more than my proposed change to charge would. Specifically, fast low-defense units will no longer be safe by flanking a big Mech because the Mech can now just spin and shoot. Why even bother having forward arcs at all in that case?

While overall I suspect this would benefit the Highlanders more than any other faction (we don't have many flanking units, our overall defenses are higher than normal and our number of big boys with average to poor arcs is a lot higher than normal... just imagine what Eriabee would be like with a 360 degree fire arc) I'm trying to be fair in my suggestions for the game.

Ultimately, the main reason people seem to think move and shoot is needed is either because of VTOLs or because they want the game to be a bit more like CBT. Well, in the latter case, CBT didn't really have move and shoot either. Turns were broken down into phases, first everyone moved, then everyone fired and only after that was the damage applied. The key here is that damage was applied after both sides got to fire (the benefit to first strike was negligible). Move and Shoot in a game like MWDA would be a devestating first strike... you move into range and shoot... and only after your target is hit and takes damage do they have the chance to respond with their reduced stats.

As to the VTOL issue, there are strategies to deal with them, but if people really feel that strongly about them, instead of ADDING move and shoot to Mechs (at which point we'd have to explain why vehicles don't get it too) why don't we just turn VTOLs into ordinary vehicles without move and shoot?

Yup, which is why I limit it to one damage for vehicles. The Mech might be a little shaken up, but its not like charging a vehicle is going to cause it to lose an arm or major weapon system. Normally, it would just take a bit of leg armor damage. Even if it penetrated the leg armor, at best it would take a single critical hit which would, at worst reduce its speed by one or two points or increase the piloting rolls for the unit.

Sometimes, yes. Again, a part of it has to do with the physics again. A Schmitt's body is only as high as a Koshi's knees. I just can't see a Mech suffering any serious damage from stubbing its toe on a tank. All the vulnerable areas of a vehicle are right at punting level for a Mech's foot while none of a Mech's vital areas are exposed to the impact.

I could easily see Arnis punting a Schmitt's turret after a running start. 100 mph combined with probably 10 tons of mass would be more than enough to disable one or both of those autocannons or tear off the missile rack. It would also probably mangle the targeting computers and/or injury the gunnery crew in the process too. At worst, Arnis would have a damaged foot actuator that would slow him down a little. If he took four clicks of impact damage he'd lose some of his lasers, his targeting computer would be out of wack and he'd have lost a lot of armor in addition to more than half his speed (he'd no longer have evade). I could see that short of damage with a full body impact like slamming into another mech, but not for a collision involving only his foot.

However, the other part has to do with the fact that you're dealing with more than just the DF Schmitt. Personally, I'd take the Marksman if I had a choice for tankdrop. Yeah, its does one less damage and its attack is one lower, but its got evade so its defense against ranged attacks is higher and it can break away from basing on a two or better so he can go right back into that transport.

Also, if side-basing became more prevailant because of impact damage do you really think those sides are going to stay unprotected for long? Instead you'll start to see either more of the Marksman in transports or you'll start to see the unit in conjunction with a pair of trikes that infiltrate and move in such a way as to cover the sides of the tank. Throw in a command vehicle and just wait to tank drop until you have four orders that turn and you can move the bikes in and tank drop all before your opponent's next turn.

I just don't think that adding extra impact damage based on a vehicle's primary damage is a sufficient enough fix to make any vehicle more viable than it already is. Throw in the fact that I don't think the physics of such a collision would warrent such severe damage to the charger and that's why I think it should be the way it is.

You realize you've just explained why changing the range to 1.5x is an insufficient change, right? You said it yourself. All you need is a Mech with a speed of 10+ (because those are so rare) to be able to charge a mech with a 16" range (which is fairly rare) from outside its firing range.

If it is still possible to charge from outside the firing range of even the longest ranged unit and everything else remains unchanged, how has this fixed charge in any way?

Okay, first of all, how do you explain the fact that a full on 100 mph charge with a multi-ton vehicle doing LESS damage than it standing still next to a unit and swinging its arms at it? I don't think charging damage should ever be less than the printed primary damage of a unit or it just doesn't make any sense at all.

Second, I really don't get the increased difficulty to charge a unit idea? You're on a Kamakazi run... you can actually correct your charge as you go (he zigs to the right, you change course to intercept... he zags to the left, you change course to intercept). Its not even like accuracy is that important, you've got an object the size of a house and you're trying to hit another object the size of a house and you're steering it as you go.

Third, why would a charge generate any more heat than simply running would? That's all you're doing after all. The only difference between a charge and a run is that at the end of one you come to a very sudden stop.

Fourth, in an full body impact between two multi-ton units with a relative velocity of upto 100mph... why should only the defender take massive damage from the impact?

Finally, the reason why it takes Mechs out of action is that your rules do nothing to really discourage units like Arnis from charging, but they do make units that do less than 5 damage on a charge now unable to charge effectively after your fix (taking one point of damage and two points of heat to MAYBE do one point to your opponent... RIGHT, you're going to see a lot of that).

All you've done is make the few units like Arnis useful in the game while not letting any of the other units become playable.

Originally posted by ltrain187
No... it isn't. The maxim breaks on anything but a 1, then drops and blows the offending unit away. At least if you charge it you can force a drop on your terms.

True...I had forgotten the whole hover-break thing. My mistake.


No. The #1 reason to not change charge is because there really is nothing wrong with it.

If you truly believe that then there is nothig anyone can say to convince you otherwise. And, I don't mean to be rude but, this confounds me.

The #2 reason is because any changes would nerf too many units that were created with charge in mind, while not affecting the best of the best chargers very much at all.

"any changes" is an awfully broad term. The changes we use (my game group) hasn't nerfed any mech. All it has done is make more mechs viable. And it still slows Arnis and the other uber-chargers.

The #3 reason is because having a viable first strike option beyond the effective firing range promotes fluid games that are not just positioning wars and base and break wars.

So you admit that you prefer to dash across the board and clang into other large metal objects instead of tactically and strategically planning out your moves and shots. OK...in that case there is nothing I can say to you is there? Have fun with that plan...very few HERE do so...enjoy. Have you considered Checkers or other equally challenging games? ;)

Right, Chris24601, that's the thing, you've hit the nail on the head:

Any REDUCTION of the efficiency/range/damage of Charge will only result in the best Charge 'Mechs becoming comparatively better to all others.

Reduce Charge range? What better 'Mech than a mobile Evade 'Mech? Reduce Charge damage? Just pick one that deal 5+ damage. Use those two "fixes together"? Now you're restricting the playing field to a handful of 'Mechs.

The only part where I really disagree with you is the validity of side-basing. I have to say that if, with only three orders per turn (or whatever bonuses he gets from the waste-of-points that is the Mobile HQ), your opponent manages not only to tank-drop you, but to make it so the tank is happily surrounded by infantry, you're not doing your job! You realize that's a MINIMUM of three orders to achieve all that? You have to question what the other player's been doing in this case, letting the opposition move freely like that...

But the one thing you haven't adressed is the balance of the tradeoff for effectively eliminating the Schmitt from play with one (self-) damaging Charge. And I think that's a fairly important point.


@ ltrain,

So the maxim breaks on a 1? Great! Charge it. Even with Impact Damage, you're taking a whole ONE point of damage by charging it. Whoopdee-doo.

hakkenshi...just to make a point. If you reduce range (to 1.5 as I recommend) you slow the over-abundance of chargers but you don't nerf it altogether.

But, in my fix action, I am not "reducing" damage. I am standarizing it. Thus ALL mechs, regardless of thier speed and primary damage, inflict the same amout of damage and with armor reducing damage (in my fix) even the uber-chargers aren't that bad anymore.

Arnis, for example, would have a 20" charge range (base to base range) amd woud inflict 3 clicks of damage to an unarmored target. 2 to one with heavy armor, 1 to one with hardened armor.

Fasial Rose would incflict one click of damage more than Arnis, due to Brawling, but with his lack of evade he has heat concerns.

To me...this is how charge should be.

OMG, sorry, but that's even worse than I thought.

ONE little click to units with Hardened Armour? Are you trying to eliminate Charge altogether???

I've said it and I'll repeat it: you can't REDUCE the damage from Charge, or too many 'Mechs fade out of the picture.

Charge's main use is to penetrate armour when you're screwed - if you eliminate that, there's a problem. Dealing substantial damage is important since there are downsides - without that, there's a problem. Reducing range makes Evade 'Mechs comparatively BETTER than other 'Mechs.

But the fact is that even if you wanted to reduce the damage from Charge, you can't ALSO have it reduced by Armour SEs. Why the heck would you EVER (and I do mean EVER) Charge if you can do more damage with a BB gun?

I can appreciate that you believe Charge should be this way, but there is no way that Ram can do 2 clicks of AP damage and Charge does LESS. High-speed collisions between 20- to 100-tonne objects should be very damaging.

hakkenshi: You still misunderstand. In that case a hardened unit takes one click.

My complete rule would be: 3 clicks, standard +1 for brawling, +1 for Melee as the primary damage (I could even see +1 for having melee as secondary or primary). That damage reduced by armor (heavy and hardened only). Ram is treated the same way...except damage is still 2.

Like you said..."Why the heck would you EVER (and I do mean EVER) Charge if you can do more damage with a BB gun?" Well...if by BB Gun you mean "Big Bad Gun" then you get my point?

Why charge? Charge is a last ditch action...not the first thing any BATTLEmech should ever do (unless of course it is specifically designed for it like a Hatchetman or something). And in that case a charge from a mech designed for CC (say having brawling and melee as primary or secondary) does do significant damage regardless of the targets armor.

Also I want to add...we are playing Mechwarrior....driving BATTLEmechs (ideally...ICE's are still out there) with large guns on them. I, for one, would really like to get back to using them for more than a make-shift lance.

Well, pardon me, but I can't quite see doing a MAXIMUM of 3 points of damage (for any 'Mech!) to a unit with Hardened Armour being very viable as a last-ditch effort.

I love the long-range stuff, too. Or perhaps I should say I love ranged combat - I actually like fast, light 'Mechs that generally don't have really long range. But neutering Charge this much is not the answer, IMHO.

By BB gun, I meant an actual, real-world pellet gun. 1 damage is about at that level.

I can't for the life of me understand how a 100-tonne 'Mech can do no more damage (heck, in some cases even LESS!) than a 'Mech half its weight. Don't forget that weight is a huge component of Charge damage.

I just can't call 3 damage "significant damage" as you do. Not when it's a kamikaze attack. It may seem more balanced, but how does it really help?

More to the point, I guess, how does this HELP Charge more than Impact Damage? I don't really call neutering "helping"...

Firstly, I am not talking about it not being tactically rewarding to do so. In case you forget what my avatar shows, it DOES show Liao. How many people do you know that charge with a Liao U?

Secondly, I would likely destroy you in a game, do not forget that next time you attempt to insult my ability/intelligence.

Thirdly, I want to assure you that there does need to be an option outside the max range of a mech or else we run into the infantry base and break wars of yore, and these are vastly complicated with Fa Shih.

Fourthly, 1.5x charge speed Obsoletes a TON of slower charge mechs (like all the charging Black Knights, off the top of my head), and that is not a good thing, since their point costs are directly related to their ability to charge.