| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bodhi
Free Worlds League
Private
Joined: 22-Sep-2003 00:00
Posts: 18
|
 Posted: 22-Sep-2003 04:43 Post subject: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
  |
|
I've noticed that Narc and iNarc (especially the standard pods) just don't seem to get used all that often, even in canon designs. Art. IV gets used a bit more often, but still isn't the most common piece of equipment used. I think it just comes down to the idea that a +2 on the Missile Hit Roll, just isn't worth the space and weight needed for the equipment given the sheer numbers of ECM units out there. So what about changing the rules up a bit?
Narc (standard homing pod) would give a +1 on the To-Hit roll for Narc equipped missiles firing at a target already hit with a Narc Pod, as well as the +2 on the Missile Hit Table.
iNarc (homing pod) would give a +2 on the To-Hit Roll and a +2 on the Missile Hit Table.
Artemis IV gives a +2 on the To-Hit Table but no bonus on the missile hit table.
All are still subject to ECM.
_________________
If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8052
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 22-Sep-2003 06:07 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
Moved from "Design Submissions" to "General Discussion".
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
Mordel
Mordel.Net
Administrator
Joined: 03-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 6036
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 22-Sep-2003 08:27 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
Honestly, I see very few people putting ECM on 'Mech designs now-a-days. Even when people take 'mechs they rarely take them if they have ECM. Naturally, this depends on the type of game you are playing, but for the usual 1v1 or 4v4 battles I see, they are rarely used.
I don't think there's enough ammo in the Narc. Heck you have to figure you're gonna miss with those puppies and there isn't enough to make it useful. Now, slap on something like 50% more and I may reconsider.
_________________
Mordel Blacknight - Site Administrator
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
Stinger
The Knights of Chaos
General
Joined: 30-Apr-2002 00:00
Posts: 1833
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 22-Sep-2003 13:23 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
For me its Ammo and RANGE. I just dont think they are useful. Especially when they only reach out to what is it 12 or 15 for Narc? I just see the weight they it takes for them as wasted since they dont have that big of an advantage.
_________________
Stinger
If it's "creepy" to use the Internet, military satellites, and robot aircraft to find a house full of gorgeous young models so I can drop in on them unexpected, then FINE, I'm "creepy". Howard Wolowitz. BBT.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Rarich
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 991
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 22-Sep-2003 14:10 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
The shots/ range /weight factors all conspire against Narc when a C3 link provides a much better advantage. a 1 ton slave C3 can give bonuses much like Narc for just 1 ton, for a whole lance! and for more than just missiles.
_________________
Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side & a dark side, and strings also lie under it all.
Life is a sexually transmitted terminal disease.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Rarich
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 991
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 22-Sep-2003 15:23 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
A house rule we used was that any mech with a C3, a MLas or SLas, and a top 10 Sensor suite (per Battle technology Lost Issues) had TAG ability, and could act as an arty spotter.
_________________
Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side & a dark side, and strings also lie under it all.
Life is a sexually transmitted terminal disease.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Daphne Wilde
Star League Defense Force
Lieutenant Colonel
Joined: 19-Sep-2003 00:00
Posts: 425
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 22-Sep-2003 15:42 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
Good rule However as any military person who knows one end of a weapon from another. Any FOOL can spot Arty. and if you want you can also use a slide rule if you need to so stands to reason a 30th century Computer can do the calc's in rote. same with a targeting laser. the incoming round/missle homes in on the freq. of the spotting laser reflection. its real simple to tune a laser to a set freq. for the round/missle to home in on.( more complex for the incoming round to have the tracking device) wich even given present day tech is simple.
? & ?
_________________
Lt.Col.Daphne Wilde
504 Para. 82 Div.
Io
? & ?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Ruger
Lyran Alliance
Hauptmann General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1915
|
| Posted: 22-Sep-2003 16:43 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
Hmm...I hardly ever design a 'Mech (or a tank for that matter) without an ECM anymore...bloody useful they are...
Ruger
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Nightward
Clan Wolf
Point Commander
Joined: 19-Sep-2003 00:00
Posts: 39
|
| Posted: 22-Sep-2003 17:24 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
I'd have liked to see them work more like their fluff descriptions.
Artemis IV is described as a spotting laser sort of thing, but it works automatically. If instead it had a to-hit roll for its priming of the missiles and you got a bonus on your to-hit or Missile Hits based on the Artemis roll, it would be much better, IMO.
Artemis IV is only worthwhile on LRMs; on SRMs, you may as well just bite the bullet and get a Streak rack, especially as the ammo costs are the same in that case.
NARC never really seemed worth it to me. Most designs with it either don't have missiles of their own, or have LRMs, which kinda defeats the point since the LRMs have longer ranges than the NARC (and Artemis would have been a far better choice any way). And as for the Clan designs with NARC...don't get me started. The majority of them have weak missile armaments or none at all, thereby completely negating the point of mounting NARC in the first place.
If NARC had longer ranges, it would be better.
Mind you, I do like the iNARC. Largely because of the Nemesis and Haywire pods...which again are not really the point 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Motown Scrapper
Clan Ice Hellions
Galaxy Commander
Joined: 24-Jul-2003 00:00
Posts: 2074
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 22-Sep-2003 21:33 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
I have yet to use a NARC on a single design of mine.I use some ECMs (I have one Omni-mech design that has it hardwired) I rarely use missiles and as a result use very few Artimes sysyems on SRMs I prefer streaks,ditto for Clan LRMs
_________________
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 |
|
Rarich
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 991
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 23-Sep-2003 00:15 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
Not all mech sensor suites had the ability to do the plotting that artillery needed at the time. A mechwarrior in a fight is not gonna have time for a slide rule either. Nor is the sensor suite going to have the radio freqs for the FDC net.
Most of the meat of my home campaign took place prior to 3050. The appearance of the Clans caused some major rewriting for the group.
I tend to be more of and RPG type than to just bash out a scenario.
_________________
Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side & a dark side, and strings also lie under it all.
Life is a sexually transmitted terminal disease.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Daphne Wilde
Star League Defense Force
Lieutenant Colonel
Joined: 19-Sep-2003 00:00
Posts: 425
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 23-Sep-2003 03:02 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
Agreed.
My usual Fav. is what I (and am sure others) call my P.E.T. system. Combines Active probe, E.C.M.system and either a T.A.G system OR a Targeting 'puter. depents on the who and how I want to kill someone (somtimes have all at once. makes for nice advantage over most foolish folks). and the best part is its cheap for tons/crits and so damn bloody handy all around.
L.t Col. Daphne Wilde
504 Para. 82 Div.
Io
[ This Message was edited by: MAD-51R on 2003-09-23 03:40 ]
_________________
Lt.Col.Daphne Wilde
504 Para. 82 Div.
Io
? & ?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
AWAD
Draconis Combine
Chu-sa
Joined: 06-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 766
|
| Posted: 23-Sep-2003 20:55 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2003-09-22 04:43, Bodhi wrote:
I've noticed that Narc and iNarc (especially the standard pods) just don't seem to get used all that often, even in canon designs. Art. IV gets used a bit more often, but still isn't the most common piece of equipment used. I think it just comes down to the idea that a +2 on the Missile Hit Roll, just isn't worth the space and weight needed for the equipment given the sheer numbers of ECM units out there. So what about changing the rules up a bit?
Narc (standard homing pod) would give a +1 on the To-Hit roll for Narc equipped missiles firing at a target already hit with a Narc Pod, as well as the +2 on the Missile Hit Table.
iNarc (homing pod) would give a +2 on the To-Hit Roll and a +2 on the Missile Hit Table.
Artemis IV gives a +2 on the To-Hit Table but no bonus on the missile hit table.
All are still subject to ECM.
|
|
Like to see people challenging the rules. I have a house rule. NARC adds +1 to hit. LRMs can be fired indirect without seeing the target if NARC missile equipped. This has been play tested and works well. Your version seems a tad it overpowered. I would slap it on many mechs.
I think you have Artemis a little confused. The way it reads it is a laser marker. So someone has to keep the target painted, this is the to hit roll. Thus the missiles travel down the marker laser and hit with more accuracy.
NARC I view as a correction homing system. So some missiles alter flight to home in on a big metallic target that has moving appendages. So you may strike a few more times, not all missiles are corrected to target.
AWAD- VTOLs are the best NARC platform
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Bodhi
Free Worlds League
Private
Joined: 22-Sep-2003 00:00
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: 23-Sep-2003 21:05 Post subject: RE: Narc, iNarc, Art. IV rules changes? |
|
|
I knew what the fluff for the Art. IV meant, but I was just kind of trying to make it a little more useful. It isn't like the time in flight for a LRM salvo (even at the max of 630 meters) is going to be all that long. A target "painted" by Art. IV should still be painted between the time the salvo is launched and the time it hits. Of course this is what Semi-Guided LRMs do so...
It just seems that Art. IV really isn't worth the weight or crit for a +2 on the Missiles Hit Chart. If it was on the To Hit Roll then yeah, but I think if the To Hit had a bonus instead of the Missiles Hitting you'd see more Narcs, iNarcs, and Art. IV. As it is, those systems are just kind of ignored because there isn't enough of a benefit to warrant their use.
_________________
If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
