Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[deadlyfire2345]

What about multiple mechs of the same weight both having ubiquitous?
For example, my Vindicator (since I got it prior to BMM) has ubiquitous and if I end up with a Phoenix Hawk that also has it, would I have to separate it for both mechs or just separate it to those that do not have it.

[Darrian Wolffe]

What about multiple mechs of the same weight both having ubiquitous?

Gotta separate.  That's to ensure that we can't use a Ubiquitous part bought for one Mech and that sits in our warehouse on a later Mech which doesn't have Ubiquitous.

[Black Omega]

Well hot damn.  PXH-3MxSR mod finished on New Year's Eve.  Kang gets 7 xp for the boxcar.  And the mech gets a positive quirk.

Hey, Rob, what kind of quirk would adding armor get?

Maybe protected actuators?

Also do the quirks on the Enforcer kick in at this time?

[Black Omega]

Well hot damn.  PXH-3MxSR mod finished on New Year's Eve.  Kang gets 7 xp for the boxcar.  And the mech gets a positive quirk.

Hey, Rob, what kind of quirk would adding armor get?

Maybe protected actuators?

Also do the quirks on the Enforcer kick in at this time?

Bump for GM.

[Darrian Wolffe]

Maybe protected actuators?

Also do the quirks on the Enforcer kick in at this time?

Yes, and yes. 

(Quirks simply for adding armor are tough to figure, and protected Actuators is a good one)

[deadlyfire2345]

1/22
Going to alter Archer some more
Using Rafael Rodruiguez (elite)
Removal of:
4 ML (LA, CTx2, RA)
1 LRM20 x 2 tons ammo (RT)
Time: 2880
TN: 5
This dice roll has been tampered with!
Rolled 2d6 : 3, 4, total 7
Addition of
2 Large Laser (LA, RA)
4 Jump Jets (2xLL, 2xRL)
2 DHS (1 Eng, 1 RT)
Time: 5400
TN: 7
This dice roll has been tampered with!
Rolled 2d6 : 6, 6, total 12

Rob, I need a GM call on a custom for Archer.
Since I added Large Lasers and Heat sinks into this custom, I was thinking Cooling Jacket for the lasers?

[Darrian Wolffe]

Rob, I need a GM call on a custom for Archer.
Since I added Large Lasers and Heat sinks into this custom, I was thinking Cooling Jacket for the lasers?

It would be Cooling Jacket for ONE laser; it's a separate Quirk for each instance of Cooling Jacket.  My preference would have been to give you Nimble Jumper, because it's a single Quirk, but it explicitly is disallowed for Heavy and Assault Mechs.  So, yeah.  One large laser gets Cooling Jacket.

[Hat]

Ok, a couple of questions on the salvaged vehicles.

1. Are all the vehicles considered crippled, i.e. 10% of value?
2. Can I strip out the medium lasers and subtract the full value of the MLs from the vehicle value before applying the 10%?  It seems silly to sell MLs at 10% of value and then buy them back at 100% of value.

With a sweep of his...

Hat

[agustaaquila]

Ok, a couple of questions on the salvaged vehicles.

1. Are all the vehicles considered crippled, i.e. 10% of value?
2. Can I strip out the medium lasers and subtract the full value of the MLs from the vehicle value before applying the 10%?  It seems silly to sell MLs at 10% of value and then buy them back at 100% of value.

With a sweep of his...

Hat

1) Yes, except in cases where the vee is disabled through some crit like crew killed.

2)  You have no mechanics able to work on the vees and remove the ml.  So you know for the future, you may also not sell underweight units.  For example, you get a hunchback with its right torso destroyed but its left arm intact.  You want the ml, so you have your techs remove the ml and not repair any destroyed locations.  Because the removed ml weighs one ton you would need to put one ton of weapons on the mech before selling it. 

[Hat]

Ok, a couple of questions on the salvaged vehicles.

1. Are all the vehicles considered crippled, i.e. 10% of value?
2. Can I strip out the medium lasers and subtract the full value of the MLs from the vehicle value before applying the 10%?  It seems silly to sell MLs at 10% of value and then buy them back at 100% of value.

With a sweep of his...

Hat

1) Yes, except in cases where the vee is disabled through some crit like crew killed.

2)  You have no mechanics able to work on the vees and remove the ml.  So you know for the future, you may also not sell underweight units.  For example, you get a hunchback with its right torso destroyed but its left arm intact.  You want the ml, so you have your techs remove the ml and not repair any destroyed locations.  Because the removed ml weighs one ton you would need to put one ton of weapons on the mech before selling it. 

Ok on #1, on #2 it makes partial sense (mechanics).  If I'm discounting the full price of the equipment removed I'm not sure why it's a problem to sell it "under weight".  It sounds like this is a rule to keep this simple, just a pain to pay 10x the price for no apparent good reason.  I expect I could hire a set of mechanics for a fraction of the price difference to pull the equipment even if it's a minimum of a month's salary with hiring bonus.

I'll work the math that way, just really annoying.

[Timberwolfd]

Ok on #1, on #2 it makes partial sense (mechanics).  If I'm discounting the full price of the equipment removed I'm not sure why it's a problem to sell it "under weight".  It sounds like this is a rule to keep this simple, just a pain to pay 10x the price for no apparent good reason.  I expect I could hire a set of mechanics for a fraction of the price difference to pull the equipment even if it's a minimum of a month's salary with hiring bonus.

I'll work the math that way, just really annoying.

You would hire the mechanic and pay the signing bonus then be on the hook for their retirement, which would negate any benefit you actually got.

[agustaaquila]

Ok on #1, on #2 it makes partial sense (mechanics).  If I'm discounting the full price of the equipment removed I'm not sure why it's a problem to sell it "under weight".  It sounds like this is a rule to keep this simple, just a pain to pay 10x the price for no apparent good reason.  I expect I could hire a set of mechanics for a fraction of the price difference to pull the equipment even if it's a minimum of a month's salary with hiring bonus.

I'll work the math that way, just really annoying.

Yes, there are a lot of rules that are written that way because A) its simpler or B)AtB does it this way with no actual in rules justification leading to frustration for us all.   There was a lot of time at the start of the campaign trying to reverse engineer numbers and ratios, until we realized that AtB has its own logic that doesn't correlate to anything else.  It eventually comes down to "how I learned to stop worrying and love the broken math of AtB"

[Timberwolfd]

Ok on #1, on #2 it makes partial sense (mechanics).  If I'm discounting the full price of the equipment removed I'm not sure why it's a problem to sell it "under weight".  It sounds like this is a rule to keep this simple, just a pain to pay 10x the price for no apparent good reason.  I expect I could hire a set of mechanics for a fraction of the price difference to pull the equipment even if it's a minimum of a month's salary with hiring bonus.

I'll work the math that way, just really annoying.

Yes, there are a lot of rules that are written that way because A) its simpler or B)AtB does it this way with no actual in rules justification leading to frustration for us all.   There was a lot of time at the start of the campaign trying to reverse engineer numbers and ratios, until we realized that AtB has its own logic that doesn't correlate to anything else.  It eventually comes down to "how I learned to stop worrying and love the broken math of AtB"

QFT

[Hat]

Ok on #1, on #2 it makes partial sense (mechanics).  If I'm discounting the full price of the equipment removed I'm not sure why it's a problem to sell it "under weight".  It sounds like this is a rule to keep this simple, just a pain to pay 10x the price for no apparent good reason.  I expect I could hire a set of mechanics for a fraction of the price difference to pull the equipment even if it's a minimum of a month's salary with hiring bonus.

I'll work the math that way, just really annoying.

You would hire the mechanic and pay the signing bonus then be on the hook for their retirement, which would negate any benefit you actually got.

I understand Mike’s point about the just accept the way it is and will, but I disagree with this assessment.

6 medium lasers @ full price - $240M, value @ 10% = $24M, net loss $216M

Hire a Veteran Mechanic - $15,000 signing bonus, $1,280 / month salary.  Retirement - $10,000 * rating (I believe 5 for a Vet) = $50,000, so $65,000 + $1,280 / month.
2 MGs ($10M = 1 ton as a swap for the 1 ton ML), so 12 MGs = $60M for equipment replacement.
Total cost of replacement equipment and a Veteran mechanic for 1 month = $126,280 + lost value $24,000 = $150,280 total cost vs. $240,000 to buy the 6 medium lasers would be a net $90,000 in my favor.

Costs for repair $407M
Complete Salvage $340M (including the $65M, excluding the Tech)
Net loss on the mission: $67M

It sounded like others were worse off than I was after the mission in terms of repairs.  Is it common to take losses on individual missions, but net out positive on the contract as a whole?

[Timberwolfd]

Probably cheaper to replace with single heatsinks.

Also, damage was relatively high and salvage pretty low this mission.