Hypothetical Senario: Glitter Boy vs. Three SAMAS

[Killer Cyborg]

Once again, I never once said he'd never get a shot off at them.

But you did indicate that.
Or, at the very least, that he might get one attack off before they close in.

I never once said it was ideal in every way.

But you seemed to assume it from your argument- you kept acting as if the -10 penalty would apply right up until the SAMs were in melee.
(and that the -10 would even apply in the first place)

Go play paintball? Dude, I was sponsored (amateur) for two or three years (I sucked, but the guys on the team and the sponsor (the inventor of constant air paintball guns) liked me, so I was a bit of a hanger on, but I was sponsored). I've played a LOT of paintball.

How often did you have cover 80% of the time while you were charging full-tilt towards the enemy?

[grandmaster z0b]

I posed the same situation Sub and you also seemed to say that the SAMAS would just close the distance and attack hand to hand, without taking into account the shots the GB would get.

[Danger]

This thread has been going back and forth for a while now, has any one played this out yet.

not properly.

Senarios will differ. You're never going to get a straight answer because their isn't one. Some can see how a GB can take 3 SAMAS, others see how 3 SAMAS can take a GB.

I think the best way, the only way to work this out is to view only the numbers. A GB has range and damage, but samas have 3x the attacks which allows options to dodge (GB can dodge, but that in the end costs him, he needs to be offensive). Given each SAMAS requires 3 shots from the boom gun to go down (requiring a total of 9 shots on average), and it will on average take 9 shots from the SAMAS to bring down a boom-gun, you're looking at a pretty balanced fight.

Except you can't make Called Shots with railguns or mini-missiles.

Nothing but a ranged weapon capable of single 'sniper' shots can make a Called Shot.

[jaymz]

Nothing but a ranged weapon capable of single 'sniper' shots can make a Called Shot.

Really? I always played it that called shots could be made by bursting weapons since you weren't aiming. Thus the two attacks and the fact you need at least a 12 to hit the target. I know you can't AIM a burst but called shots aren;t aimed per se. They are just the person trying to direct thier shots at a specified area of the target. Ther eis a difference between the two.

[Subjugator]

How often did you have cover 80% of the time while you were charging full-tilt towards the enemy?

This is the only pertinent question, as the others have either been addressed by previous posts or require that one add to my words to arrive at them as a question.

80% of the time is how often they had cover. I never said they were 'charging full-tilt' towards the enemy.

/Sub

[Dog_O_War]

Sub, so far in this thread you've proven my "atleast half a dozen faults in your math" remark, or rather - other posters have.

And when these points are made via the RAW, you have either failed to respond to them or stated "I don't believe in that basis" or "that's not how I interpret the RAW".

As well kept assuming that you're going to recieve maximum benefit from the terrain while the Glitterboy recieves little to none.

That is intellectual dishonesty. You've also been quite rude to many of the posters in this thread.

As well, you've assumed a great many irregularities in the mannerisms of the SAMAS.

I only ask that you reconsider your position on the matter; do a proper calculation and assume that you can and will be hit as your cover isn't infinite.



Also, to Killer_Cyborg;

While the intention of the dodge-rule "dodging while leaping" may intend for this to occur, consider that...

A: I never consider intent for these rules, as they are poorly written. I mean really - they are intended to work smoothly and without hitches, but we can see the glaring errors in that. So when disscussing them, I'd never go with what is intended, and only bet on what is written. And what is written is indicating that the SAMAS gets this bonus in mid-leap or in mid-flight.

B: What is written is made for PA that can either fly or perform incredible jet-assisted leaps and are capable of changing direction mid-air because they are fliers.

The SAMSON is a perfect example as to why it should be only taken as written as well. It too is capable of jet-assisted leaps of great distances, ones that can span attack-schemes (and will be mid-air when the next target shoots), but it is denied the bonus because it's not on the ground-based PA list. So what then is the difference between a split-second leap made by the two suits of PA (the SAMAS and the SAMSON)? If all the SAMAS did was a little 6ft jump and the SAMSON does a 100ft leap, why the difference in bonus? (besides it being on different lists)
I'm betting that it has everything to do with training while flying and nothing to do with leaping ability. Which would bring us to the conclusion that the SAMAS (an air-based PA) gets the bonus because he practices mid-air dodges, while the SAMSON doesn't because he lacks that training.

C: it is ludicrus to believe that a little hop nets anyone a +5 bonus; only the training of dodging in mid-air makes any semblence of sense.

[dark brandon]

A: I never consider intent for these rules, as they are poorly written. I mean really - they are intended to work smoothly and without hitches, but we can see the glaring errors in that. So when disscussing them, I'd never go with what is intended, and only bet on what is written. And what is written is indicating that the SAMAS gets this bonus in mid-leap or in mid-flight.

I think the reason one should use intent for rules is because they are poorly written. It wasn't intended to work smoothly and without hitches. That's now how the rules read, that's not how kevin has ever said they are. He has pretty much stated time and time again they are more like guidelines and it's how you play that changes it.

[Subjugator]

Sub, so far in this thread you've proven my "atleast half a dozen faults in your math" remark, or rather - other posters have.

And when these points are made via the RAW, you have either failed to respond to them or stated "I don't believe in that basis" or "that's not how I interpret the RAW".

You are the one providing 'interpreted' RAW, by adding words to them. I look at the words exactly as they are written, and I read them exactly as they are written.

As well kept assuming that you're going to recieve maximum benefit from the terrain while the Glitterboy recieves little to none.

I never did that. You repeatedly assumed I was doing that, despite my statements to the contrary. You know - those statements where I said the SAMs were not even shooting at him as they advanced. You AGAIN have ignored the explicit words that I've used in this discussion.

That is intellectual dishonesty. You've also been quite rude to many of the posters in this thread.

Yes. Your ignoring the words of others...ones that have been stated time and again, is intellectually dishonest and rude. Have I been rude? Certainly, from time to time...in response to your stubborn refusal to pay attention to the words I'm using. I don't believe I've been rude to anyone else, because nobody else has acted as if I've not said certain things that I have said repeatedly in this thread.

As well, you've assumed a great many irregularities in the mannerisms of the SAMAS.

You're assuming the SAMs will not be played as intelligently as possible in a situation where they are REQUIRED to fight a Glitter Boy. If you call playing them to their strengths irregular, be my guest.

I only ask that you reconsider your position on the matter; do a proper calculation and assume that you can and will be hit as your cover isn't infinite.

I've never said I cannot be hit. Quite the opposite, I've said...again...repeatedly...that I can be hit. I've done proper calculations. It is you who have ignored the proper calculations because you keep assuming that seeing something near your target is the same as seeing your target.

C: it is ludicrus to believe that a little hop nets anyone a +5 bonus; only the training of dodging in mid-air makes any semblence of sense.

Funny, but you just said you don't consider intent. Leaping to dodge does not consider intent. One can leap and dodge at the same time. You're now talking about this being the only option that makes sense (which is untrue), but if you consider how it makes sense, you're not reading the rules as they are written.

...and yet you accuse ME of intellectual dishonesty. Are you still claiming that you can see someone if you can see the heat signature above them?

/Sub

[Dog_O_War]

Sub, so far in this thread you've proven my "atleast half a dozen faults in your math" remark, or rather - other posters have.

And when these points are made via the RAW, you have either failed to respond to them or stated "I don't believe in that basis" or "that's not how I interpret the RAW".

You are the one providing 'interpreted' RAW, by adding words to them. I look at the words exactly as they are written, and I read them exactly as they are written.

I never add any words.
And my interpretations are almost always correct. If they weren't, I give a nod to the person with a more correct interpretation of them.

As well kept assuming that you're going to recieve maximum benefit from the terrain while the Glitterboy recieves little to none.

I never did that. You repeatedly assumed I was doing that, despite my statements to the contrary.

Sub, you spelled it out in big bold letters that it required a 20 to always hit the SAMAS. That included the cover bonus, movement bonus, dodging bonus, etc. That is anything but "to the contrary" on your part.

You know - those statements where I said the SAMs were not even shooting at him as they advanced.

That has nothing to do with the "penalties of terrain" and everything to do with avoiding simultaineous strikes.

That is intellectual dishonesty. You've also been quite rude to many of the posters in this thread.

Yes. Your ignoring the words of others...ones that have been stated time and again, is intellectually dishonest and rude. Have I been rude? Certainly, from time to time...in response to your stubborn refusal to pay attention to the words I'm using.

Sub, the words you've been using have not been kind. Why would I pay attention to them?
And beyond that, I have paid attention to them despite the above. Your words leave little to the imagination when it comes to your view of the senario. You've basically stated that you think you have constant cover all the way up to melee by posting it in big red letters "you need 20s to hit me". That goes against the senario provided, and shows a miscalculation on your part. A big red-glaring one at that. All I did was ask for you to correct these and reconsider your position.

I don't believe I've been rude to anyone else, because nobody else has acted as if I've not said certain things that I have said repeatedly in this thread.

Yes, but you say one absolute to me and then go and say "well I don't mean it'll be that way all the time" to someone else.

As well, you've assumed a great many irregularities in the mannerisms of the SAMAS.

You're assuming the SAMs will not be played as intelligently as possible in a situation where they are REQUIRED to fight a Glitter Boy. If you call playing them to their strengths irregular, be my guest.

All I was hinting at is that they may not know they're up against a Glitterboy given the radar-distortion of the ruins themselves. Sure, their combat-computers have the Glitterboy in their identifiers, but can it identify what the radar may not immediately detect?
Yet you have them instantly in "Glitterboy combat-pattern Alpha" so to speak. Doesn' that seem irregular to instantly assume "Glitterboy!"

I only ask that you reconsider your position on the matter; do a proper calculation and assume that you can and will be hit as your cover isn't infinite.

I've never said I cannot be hit. Quite the opposite, I've said...again...repeatedly...that I can be hit.

12.5% I believe you said; that is assuming that it will always require a 20 for the Glitterboy to hit - which is false and a miscalculation on your part. You never considered that you might be caught out of cover, or that you may not be able to jump-dodge, or that it might be impossible to be evasive, etc...

I've done proper calculations.

See above as to why you haven't.

It is you who have ignored the proper calculations because you keep assuming that seeing something near your target is the same as seeing your target.

I never assumed that. Please re-read my post.

C: it is ludicrus to believe that a little hop nets anyone a +5 bonus; only the training of dodging in mid-air makes any semblence of sense.

Funny, but you just said you don't consider intent. Leaping to dodge does not consider intent. One can leap and dodge at the same time. You're now talking about this being the only option that makes sense (which is untrue), but if you consider how it makes sense, you're not reading the rules as they are written.

See, this is what I'm talking about when I was pointing out intellectual dishonesty. I gave two reasons before this that did not hint at intent, but instead used both RAW and in-game logic as to why before I bothered to appease those that like intent.

And yet you only quoted the portion that would make me look like a hypocrite when taken out of context.

...and yet you accuse ME of intellectual dishonesty.

I still do, but I'm not shouting your name.

Are you still claiming that you can see someone if you can see the heat signature above them?

/Sub

How high do you think this signature is? Meters? I pegged it at about a foot in a guestimate personally. I'd say that's close enough as this isn't a laser-weapon.
That aside; yes - if you can glean a heat-sig from a target I'd say that it's good enough (in most cases*)

*A human fireball radiating thousands of degrees of heat probably wouldn't cut it.

[Subjugator]

Dog-O-War, I'm done with this. Your posts lack intellectual honesty and you call seeing evidence of something seeing something. If I'm moving in trees and you see the leaves move, you do not see me. That you cannot or will not grasp the difference between those two circumstances and that you cannot or will not pay attention to the actual rules that dispute your position when they are presented to you tells me all I need to know about your positions.

You want to ignore the rules, that's up to you, but I'm not going to argue with you when you do.

/Sub

[Danger]

Dog-O-War, I'm done with this. Your posts lack intellectual honesty and you call seeing evidence of something seeing something. If I'm moving in trees and you see the leaves move, you do not see me. That you cannot or will not grasp the difference between those two circumstances and that you cannot or will not pay attention to the actual rules that dispute your position when they are presented to you tells me all I need to know about your positions.

You want to ignore the rules, that's up to you, but I'm not going to argue with you when you do.

/Sub

Sub, you're also assuming a great many things - such as some sort of permanent cover bonus for the Samas, and assigning penalties to the Glitterboy without considering similar penalties for the Samas, and some other rules, which is just as dishonest.

Regardless, the argument isn't going to be solved by name-calling.

[Subjugator]

Sub, you're also assuming a great many things - such as some sort of permanent cover bonus for the Samas, and assigning penalties to the Glitterboy without considering similar penalties for the Samas, and some other rules, which is just as dishonest.

I was assigning penalties only to the GB because the SAMs were not shooting when using the cover. When they had ceased to be under cover, they were advancing for melee combat, at which time neither of the penalties would apply.

Regardless, the argument isn't going to be solved by name-calling.

Actually, I didn't name call. I described his behaviors, hit his person.

/Sub

[J_cobbers]

Dog-O-War, I'm done with this. Your posts lack intellectual honesty and you call seeing evidence of something seeing something. If I'm moving in trees and you see the leaves move, you do not see me. That you cannot or will not grasp the difference between those two circumstances and that you cannot or will not pay attention to the actual rules that dispute your position when they are presented to you tells me all I need to know about your positions.

You want to ignore the rules, that's up to you, but I'm not going to argue with you when you do.

/Sub

The absence of evidence, is not the evidence of absence. Controverally the presence of evidence, is not the evidence of presence. Sub is correct that the heat trail is not the same as seeing the PA. Like looking at contrails left by plane you get the trajectory and an idea of where the plane is. But if it is behind a cloud (aka cover) you won't know it's precise location. The contrails fade with time, and are subject being scattered by the wind. By comparison, a SAMAS behind cover radiating heat gives you an idea of where it has been and where it might be heading, but no definite location, and behind a large building it will take awhile for that hot air radiating to reach areas visible to the GB. The best Thermo can do from behind large thick cover is give a rough location, thus the GB is firing blind. Not to mention he won't know how high up the SAMAS are on the debris pile they are hiding behind.

Tactically when behind such cover the GB can choose to either spray and pray into the rough location of the SAMAS or try to coverty flank the position and get a clear shot.

I think Sub imagines more cover than most of the people in this thread, more than I do, but in some instances when behind something large enough to totally obscure line of sight he is correct.

[jaymz]

I still think the original scenario played out earlier was done with little tactical thinking involved.

The played out scenario effectively had the Samas coming in formation down the street as if they had no idea anythign was tehre yet they knew there was "something" there. The glitterboy MAY have an idea where they are but the Sams woudl have an idea where the GB might be too. As a PA pilot using tactics, my first though would be "hmm just had a conctact that disappeared .... too much debris... where woudl I go if I were him..." not march down the street in formation that much I can tell you... and the GB may get an action to surprise attack but if he can see them they can see him and vice versa. The scenario basically had hte Smas not having a clue where he was yet the GB knew full well where they were even though they had cover. Not to mention the fact a 10 ft tall 1 ton humanoi marched into a 300 years junked out skyscraper for cover in which the cast majority of floor are only 10 feet tall to start with. He'd be causing havoc and animals to scatter and dust and whatnot IFhe didnt just collapse thru the floor.

While I don;t full agree with Sub, the scenario was either played by peopel who cannot thinkg tactically or wanted the GB to win IMO.

[Nekira Sudacne]

Wow, turn around for a few days and this thread exploded

Well, to answer a few questions that have aroused: Yes, the SAMAS and the Glitter Boy both detect each-other at the same time, and both have time to take cover or simply dive at each-other firing away as the senario builder wants.

[jaymz]

Wow, turn around for a few days and this thread exploded

Well, to answer a few questions that have aroused: Yes, the SAMAS and the Glitter Boy both detect each-other at the same time, and both have time to take cover or simply dive at each-other firing away as the senario builder wants.

Can we assume these to be experienced pilots so they are all 5th level or so?

May just go ahead and try to play this out on my own somehow....maps etc if I can figure out a way to do it that no one will think Ima being biased one way or the other....

[Nekira Sudacne]

Wow, turn around for a few days and this thread exploded

Well, to answer a few questions that have aroused: Yes, the SAMAS and the Glitter Boy both detect each-other at the same time, and both have time to take cover or simply dive at each-other firing away as the senario builder wants.

Can we assume these to be experienced pilots so they are all 5th level or so?

May just go ahead and try to play this out on my own somehow....maps etc if I can figure out a way to do it that no one will think Ima being biased one way or the other....

I assumed they were all mid level pilots, 5-6th level.

Nekira since you started the thread, Concerning the mini-missle issue, can they be fired at the boom gun or do they hit the main body on a hit? This would change a lot of the Tactics I would most likely use on both sides.

Missiles only hit the main body.

There was a defence manuver I remember from the earliy rifts that said that a robot could cover his main body with the arms, and ONLY the arms would take damage, as opposed to not covering the main body, in which case the main body but NOT the arms would take damage.

From that it's safe to assume that missles hit ONLY the main body and cannot be used for called shots.

[jaymz]

I assumed they were all mid level pilots, 5-6th level.

Any suggestions as to how to do this via a map by any chance? I have some of my own ideas but it woudl be nice to get your suggestions before I set this up to be played out.

[Nekira Sudacne]

I assumed they were all mid level pilots, 5-6th level.

Any suggestions as to how to do this via a map by any chance? I have some of my own ideas but it woudl be nice to get your suggestions before I set this up to be played out.

it's in a city ruins. Pick any generic ruined city map.

[jaymz]

I assumed they were all mid level pilots, 5-6th level.

Any suggestions as to how to do this via a map by any chance? I have some of my own ideas but it woudl be nice to get your suggestions before I set this up to be played out.

it's in a city ruins. Pick any generic ruined city map.

I meant table top map for movement etc actually. Think I'll jus use one of battletech maps of forested terrain. Trees representing rubble and elevatiosn represting whats left of building etc.

Then make a note of every move made turn by turn, skill roll by skill roll.

[Nekira Sudacne]

I assumed they were all mid level pilots, 5-6th level.

Any suggestions as to how to do this via a map by any chance? I have some of my own ideas but it woudl be nice to get your suggestions before I set this up to be played out.

it's in a city ruins. Pick any generic ruined city map.

I meant table top map for movement etc actually. Think I'll jus use one of battletech maps of forested terrain. Trees representing rubble and elevatiosn represting whats left of building etc.

Then make a note of every move made turn by turn, skill roll by skill roll.

I don't use maps for gaming so I really couldn't help you there.

[jaymz]

The arm moved in front of the main body is also in the R:UE. Any decent Glitterboy pilot would use the free arm as a sacrifice. Then it's finding enough cover to limit where the SAMAS can attack in as limited a way as possible.

From the SAMAS point of view, Safely closing the distance from as many ways as possible maintaining speed over attacking, covering the approach of the damaged one, Basically Harassing the Glitter Boy. Until all three together can unload into the Glitterboy and the boomgun especially.

However, with equal experience levels and competent players I'd say without a lot of luck on the side of the SAMAS pilots, they can't destroy the boomgun quickly enough to prevent the chance of at least one being removed in some way by the Glitter boy.

Trying to remember the Damage and MDC involved Six decent hits by the Glitterboy eliminate the SAMAS, I think. Now the SAMAS have to cause enough damage to the boom gun to destroy it, as it has the smallest amount of MDC that can actually remove the threat from the engagement. It Takes nat 20 on the missile hits of at least 2 to even make it possible. It has happened before. But counting on it as an effective plan would be unwise.

Basically I'm saying all PILOTS being equal the glitterboy has to much of an advantage in that destroying it's weapon system is the only timely way to make that happen, Which almost always happens from the luck of the dice and not some well planned attck method.

Well looking at teh basics a 5th level GB has 8 attacks, each Sam will have 6 for a total of 18.


Assuming 50% of the attacks hit for the Sams due to cover movment and say 35-40% because the Sams are mobile and using cover etc as well the GB can dish out about 300-320 MD in a melee the Sams with their own railguns will do about 225-250 give or take. By the end of the roudn 1 sam will be gone. Next melee Sams will do about 150 GB will do about 300-320 again. Second sam will be dead. Last sam will due about 70-80 and the Gb will be able to do another 300-320. Third sam is dead but GB has taken well over 400 points of Damage if they only shot atthe main body. another 50+ if they used the mini-missiles.

So GB can beat a triple Sam unit but he wont be in good shape afterwards. And he won;t want another encounter anytime soon because he is now essentially as weak as normal power armours. This is of course not been actually played but using the basic of basic information.

[Danger]

The arm moved in front of the main body is also in the R:UE. Any decent Glitterboy pilot would use the free arm as a sacrifice. Then it's finding enough cover to limit where the SAMAS can attack in as limited a way as possible.

Not a bad plan if the Glitterboy is concerned about the MDC of his main body. Yes, I was assuming that the Glitterboy would try to limit the Samas access as much as possible.

From the SAMAS point of view, Safely closing the distance from as many ways as possible maintaining speed over attacking, covering the approach of the damaged one, Basically Harassing the Glitter Boy. Until all three together can unload into the Glitterboy and the boomgun especially.

Unload on the Boomgun with what? Their 1d4 single shots from their rail gun?

However, with equal experience levels and competent players I'd say without a lot of luck on the side of the SAMAS pilots, they can't destroy the boomgun quickly enough to prevent the chance of at least one being removed in some way by the Glitter boy.

It's almost impossible for them to destroy the Boomgun before the Glitterboy kills them all.

Trying to remember the Damage and MDC involved Six decent hits by the Glitterboy eliminate the SAMAS, I think. Now the SAMAS have to cause enough damage to the boom gun to destroy it, as it has the smallest amount of MDC that can actually remove the threat from the engagement. It Takes nat 20 on the missile hits of at least 2 to even make it possible. It has happened before. But counting on it as an effective plan would be unwise.

Missiles always hit the main body, and cannot be used for the called shots required to hit the Boomgun. The Boomgun is impervious to missile damage in this situation.

Basically I'm saying all PILOTS being equal the Glitterboy has too much of an advantage in that destroying it's weapon system is the only timely way to make that happen, Which almost always happens from the luck of the dice and not some well planned attack method.

Luck of the dice will play a factor in this situation; it always does. If the Samas focus on dealing damage to the Boomgun, it's only a matter of time before the Glitterboy destroys them all.

Even Subjugator had to concede this point, which is why he shifted his tactics to W.W.E. wrasslin'.

[Danger]

So GB can beat a triple Sam unit but he won't be in good shape afterwards. And he won't want another encounter anytime soon because he is now essentially as weak as normal power armours. This is of course not been actually played but using the basic of basic information.

I always assumed the Glitterboy wouldn't come out of this combat smelling of roses, you are right. Lucky dice rolls nonewithstanding.

He might have as much M.D.C. as most other power armors, but he still has his Boomgun.

[Danger]

Wow, turn around for a few days and this thread exploded

Well, to answer a few questions that have aroused: Yes, the SAMAS and the Glitter Boy both detect each-other at the same time, and both have time to take cover or simply dive at each-other firing away as the senario builder wants.

Can we assume these to be experienced pilots so they are all 5th level or so?

May just go ahead and try to play this out on my own somehow....maps etc if I can figure out a way to do it that no one will think Ima being biased one way or the other....

I was actually assuming they were all 1st level, so as to not have to calculate all the additional various leveling-up bonuses. It was a little simpler that way.

[jaymz]

So GB can beat a triple Sam unit but he won't be in good shape afterwards. And he won't want another encounter anytime soon because he is now essentially as weak as normal power armours. This is of course not been actually played but using the basic of basic information.

I always assumed the Glitterboy wouldn't come out of this combat smelling of roses, you are right. Lucky dice rolls nonewithstanding.

He might have as much M.D.C. as most other power armors, but he still has his Boomgun.

Now had this been against a Striker Sam or Super Sam...well then with thier payloads of Minimissiles.....Toss up and possibly in favor of the Sams...but again its matter of playingit out properly. I just went by some very basic stats

[Danger]

I still think the original scenario played out earlier was done with little tactical thinking involved.

The played out scenario effectively had the Samas coming in formation down the street as if they had no idea anythign was tehre yet they knew there was "something" there. The glitterboy MAY have an idea where they are but the Sams woudl have an idea where the GB might be too. As a PA pilot using tactics, my first though would be "hmm just had a conctact that disappeared .... too much debris... where woudl I go if I were him..." not march down the street in formation that much I can tell you... and the GB may get an action to surprise attack but if he can see them they can see him and vice versa. The scenario basically had hte Smas not having a clue where he was yet the GB knew full well where they were even though they had cover. Not to mention the fact a 10 ft tall 1 ton humanoi marched into a 300 years junked out skyscraper for cover in which the cast majority of floor are only 10 feet tall to start with. He'd be causing havoc and animals to scatter and dust and whatnot IFhe didnt just collapse thru the floor.

While I don;t full agree with Sub, the scenario was either played by peopel who cannot think tactically or wanted the GB to win IMO.

I haven't 'played out' the scenario, but I've been considering tactics the whole time.

My opinion was similar to yours; the Samas would not stay in any kind of close formation. Especially given the terrain in this scenario. 3 Samas locate 1 Glitterboy in the ruins of a city? Radar or not, you may as well have said you dropped a needle in a haystack. They will most likely have to split up to locate the bogey.

Once that happens, it is not as simple as 3 Samas vs 1 Glitterboy. It likely would be 1 Samas vs 1 Glitterboy, until the Samas 2 buddies can show up. All the Glitterboy needs to do is to separate the Samas, and their numerical advantage disappears.

I've never considered the Glitterboy trying to enter and hide in any of the buildings. I'd consider that a last resort, and almost as risky as fighting the 3 Samas to begin with. I would have no desire to have a building fall on my head if I were a Glitterboy pilot. Hang out near some buildings or large debris to throw off radar? Sure. Go inside a building? Yikes.

[jaymz]

I still think the original scenario played out earlier was done with little tactical thinking involved.

The played out scenario effectively had the Samas coming in formation down the street as if they had no idea anythign was tehre yet they knew there was "something" there. The glitterboy MAY have an idea where they are but the Sams woudl have an idea where the GB might be too. As a PA pilot using tactics, my first though would be "hmm just had a conctact that disappeared .... too much debris... where woudl I go if I were him..." not march down the street in formation that much I can tell you... and the GB may get an action to surprise attack but if he can see them they can see him and vice versa. The scenario basically had hte Smas not having a clue where he was yet the GB knew full well where they were even though they had cover. Not to mention the fact a 10 ft tall 1 ton humanoi marched into a 300 years junked out skyscraper for cover in which the cast majority of floor are only 10 feet tall to start with. He'd be causing havoc and animals to scatter and dust and whatnot IFhe didnt just collapse thru the floor.

While I don;t full agree with Sub, the scenario was either played by peopel who cannot think tactically or wanted the GB to win IMO.

I haven't 'played out' the scenario, but I've been considering tactics the whole time.

My opinion was similar to yours; the Samas would not stay in any kind of close formation. Especially given the terrain in this scenario. 3 Samas locate 1 Glitterboy in the ruins of a city? Radar or not, you may as well have said you dropped a needle in a haystack. They will most likely have to split up to locate the bogey.

Once that happens, it is not as simple as 3 Samas vs 1 Glitterboy. It likely would be 1 Samas vs 1 Glitterboy, until the Samas 2 buddies can show up. All the Glitterboy needs to do is to separate the Samas, and their numerical advantage disappears.

I've never considered the Glitterboy trying to enter and hide in any of the buildings. I'd consider that a last resort, and almost as risky as fighting the 3 Samas to begin with. I would have no desire to have a building fall on my head if I were a Glitterboy pilot. Hang out near some buildings or large debris to throw off radar? Sure. Go inside a building? Yikes.

not to mention teh target yo make yourself the first time you fire from said perch.....

Glad to see I am not the only one thinking this way......

[Nekira Sudacne]

Wow, turn around for a few days and this thread exploded

Well, to answer a few questions that have aroused: Yes, the SAMAS and the Glitter Boy both detect each-other at the same time, and both have time to take cover or simply dive at each-other firing away as the senario builder wants.

Can we assume these to be experienced pilots so they are all 5th level or so?

May just go ahead and try to play this out on my own somehow....maps etc if I can figure out a way to do it that no one will think Ima being biased one way or the other....

I was actually assuming they were all 1st level, so as to not have to calculate all the additional various leveling-up bonuses. It was a little simpler that way.

I was actually meaning for them all to be 6th level, it's my bad for forgettingting to mention it.

[jaymz]

I was actually meaning for them all to be 6th level, it's my bad for forgettingting to mention it.

That just makes it worse for the SAMs...

WildWalker

My quickie scenario aboe was if they were 5th level or so, so not really worse, about the same...

[Nekira Sudacne]

I was actually meaning for them all to be 6th level, it's my bad for forgettingting to mention it.

That just makes it worse for the SAMs...

WildWalker

Howso? I just figured it was more realistic for all of them to be about medium experiacned.

[Danger]

I was actually meaning for them all to be 6th level, it's my bad for forgettingting to mention it.

No worries. As I said, I kept them at 1st level to avoid having to add up all the various bonuses from here & yon.

[Babel]

Anyone advocating that the SAMs land and close the distance on the ground has it entirely wrong, even if you assume they can move from extreme range to melee range entirely behind cover forcing the GB pilot to fire blind. The SAMs best bet is to close to melee range as quickly as possible thereby rendering the GBs only weapon useless or mostly useless.

On the ground the SAMs move at 1320'/round. Assuming the GB pilot begins to fire at 14,300' (130% of the GB range) it will take over 10 rounds for them to close the distance, the SAMs would get there just before the GBs last shot on round 11. The GB pilot could buy himself even more time (2 additional full rounds) by moving slowly backwards at 10mph while firing. Even stationary in the 10+ rounds it takes the SAMs to close in the GB can put 87 rounds in the air assuming a legacy GB pilot with boxing, martial arts, and elite combat training (8 actions per round). 20 of those actions would be at extended range, requiring a natural 20 to hit, but statisticly that would happen once in 20 shots. The average damage of a BG is 105 MD, a crit is 210 MD, so even at that extreme range he has a pretty decent chance of at least severly wounding a SAM, and a 37.5% chance of taking one out entirely. For the rest of the time the GB would 'only' need a 15 or better for a chance to hit which would happen on 30% of his attacks. So of the 67 remaining shots 20 would be possible hits, 3 crits, 17 non crits. For the non crits a grounded SAM would have a 75% chance to dodge (assuming +4 to dodge) so 4 of the 17 non crits would actually land doing a combined total of 420 MD. Even if you assume the SAMs get really lucky and dodge 1 crit they will still take over 1000 MD in combined damage from all the hits sustained over the almost 3 minutes it would take to get into melee range.

Now compare that with flying. In flight the SAM moves at 6600'/round, if combat began again at 14,300' it takes slightly over 2 rounds to close the distance. The GB would only get 18 shots in the air before they get to him, 4 at extreme range, 14 at regular range. His chance to hit at extreme range jumps from 5% to 30% but with only half a round to work with the GB most likely isn't going to get more then one possible hit and in the air the SAM would have an 85% chance to dodge it. During his 14 other actions the GB has a fairly decent 55% chance to hit which would be 7-8 possible hits out of the 14 attacks, but the SAMs would dodge all but 2 or 3 of them meaning there is a fairly decent chance that all 3 SAMs make it to melee range with the GB, at most perhaps 1 would be destroyed if the GB got a bit lucky with the dice.

I rolled each of these scenarios out 5 times each. Because I didn't feel like messing with the complexities and metagaming issues of melee combat I just counted the attempt as a success for the GB if he could take out at least 2 SAMs before they got into melee range, otherwise it went to the SAMs. The GB won all of the ground scenarios, he destroyed all SAMs 3 of the 5 times while they were still a decent ways away, in 1 the last SAM went down just before it was in melee range, and in the other attempt 1 SAM actually made it into melee range but was at half main body MDC. The SAMs won all of the air scenarios. In 3 of the 5 attempts 1 SAM was lost closing into melee range, in the other 2 attempts all 3 SAMs made it to melee range (once without taking any damage, and in the other 1 SAM was at -220 MDC)

[popscythe]

Weighing in on this one late seems pretty foolish, but here's my take after spending seemingly forever reading the thread.

1. This whole deal has gotten really far afield, but kudos to those who tried to keep the discussion grounded.
2. I believe that none of the discussions so far have really examined the most tactically sound way for the SAMs to fight the GB: Hit and Run. The GB needs to be able to perceive his target to shoot directly at it, even if he has a fairly specific blip on his radar. With three SAMs, the GB would be exposed to fire from one or more of the SAMs most times it even attempted to find them to fire at them. To be stable to fire the GB needs to have his feet on the ground, so utilizing low cover won't work unless the GM is allowing Limbo shots or some such. The shockwave of the boom gun would (IMO) make hiding from the SAMs impossible (just look for the giant dust cloud in the direction of the boom, after the first shot impacts of course because it is supersonic).

The SAMs are definitely going to want to plink the GB from behind/to the sides, then reposition to new cover, knowing that the GB will be waiting to nail them as soon as they peek out. The GB's best tactic is just that, to brave any shots the SAMs might fire and just nail one of them at any opportunity. In this uphill battle of cat and mouse, the SAMs will need to draw the GB out of cover, dodge it's attack and then reposition to cover again. If played correctly, assuming coordination on the part of the SAM pilots (I don't think they'd be coordinated well enough to all go for a perfect alternating hold-fest without discussing it beforehand, but they would definitely, over their radios, be doing things like "I'm going to draw his fire on 3, you shoot him in the back while I do. 1, 2, 3!" or "He's at 5oclock!" in this type of situation. If the highly mobile SAMs can use their movement speed to make wide circles around the GB to stay behind it and in optimum cover (choosing new cover before you jump out from behind your current cover, etc) and use fancy flying to aid dodge attempts when drawing fire, they could definitely whittle the GB down. In my opinion it would simply take forever for them to win.

What could the GB do to prevent them from using this strategy? Destroy all available cover for them? Theoretically possible. Shoot through their cover? Possible, but unlikely to succeed. However, if the GB nails a SAM, that SAM is definitely in trouble and should probably stay under cover and only take shots when the GB is shooting in a different direction (GB can only fire in the direction it is facing, which gives the SAMs a really easy way of identifying when it a good time to pop out for a free back shot. Knowing when a shot is coming and knowing that someone might take a shot at you sometime is two different things, unless you hear the SAMs behind and to the side of you moving out of cover just before they fire.

Thoughts? Notice I started the SAMs within rail gun range. I don't think there's a question that the GB will win outside the SAMs raingun range, but I'd still bet on the SAMs if I had the opportunity to run them, using aerial antics to hopefully dodge the seven to fourteen "free" shots before they were in range. Going for sheer luck there, but I think the real question on everyone's minds in these discussions is "Is the GB strong enough to defeat the SAMs even if they don't have to muck about outside their own weapon's ranges".

[Danger]

It's...alive...!

[popscythe]

It's...alive...!

If that was necromancy, then this thread is a murder wraith.

[Mack]

Check the original post date in the "Support the Coalition" topic.

[popscythe]

Sorry I assumed the thread wasn't that old because nobody seems to have come up with a working strategy akin to the one I suggested (one that doesn't require so much shenanigans).

I still think it's a valid topic, even though everyone here might be sick to death of it.

[SkyeFyre]

Fact: It's impossible to come to a 100% concrete answer. Depending on dice rolls, on how each side plays it out it could go either way. Generally if you do the math to see who's going to win in a stand up fight... that usually tells you how closely matched they are but won't actually tell you who'll win every time or even most of the time. Too many variables. My answer on this topic is that it can go either way depending on how each side plays their cards.

[Nomadic]

I'm over reading 8 pages of this after the 4th page.

The Answer to the OP is simple.

Who EVER PLAYER'S THE CHARACTER(S) BETTER!

3 Sam, vs 1 GB Is Balanced.

1) GB See's them on radar... Sam can't see the GB as radar doesn't work under X feet.
2) Once in Melee Range one Shot from the GB and they are deaf, unless this has been changed.

Characters
who are in protective body or power armor will have some protection,
but are still temporarily deafened for 1D4 minutes; same penalties
apply. Which are listed as and are -8 on initiative and —3 to parry and dodge.

And come someone please Tell me what page it says that the GB even has Radar or the SAMM for that matter because neither the RUE or the CoreRules say either have it.

[jaymz]

The ywon;t be deaf as they are in side a environmentally sealed Power Armour. Sonic Boom will not deafen them.

Also in theory the Glitterboy wont detect them on radar either since Sams typically only fly a couple of hundred feet above the ground. That is well below most radar detection levels.

[Nomadic]

The ywon;t be deaf as they are in side a environmentally sealed Power Armour. Sonic Boom will not deafen them.

Also in theory the Glitterboy wont detect them on radar either since Sams typically only fly a couple of hundred feet above the ground. That is well below most radar detection levels.

Can you tell me where I can find that EPA would pervent this? Per Cannon, EPA is still PA and See above quote.

Still can't find how either one of them would EVEN have radar!

[Shark_Force]

The ywon;t be deaf as they are in side a environmentally sealed Power Armour. Sonic Boom will not deafen them.

Also in theory the Glitterboy wont detect them on radar either since Sams typically only fly a couple of hundred feet above the ground. That is well below most radar detection levels.

Can you tell me where I can find that EPA would pervent this? Per Cannon, EPA is still PA and See above quote.

Still can't find how either one of them would EVEN have radar!

- SAMAS is a power armor. it is *also* a military vehicle. one specifically designed to operate alongside the glitter boy, no less. note that power armor and military vehicle are not inherently mutually exclusive categories, nor are they automatically the same thing (for example, the triax terrain hopper has a military and a non-military version, therefore a given power armor is not necessarily a military vehicle, meaning that there is room for overlap). since military vehicles *are* shielded from the sonic boom of a glitter boy, and the SAMAS is a military vehicle it is protected from the sonic boom of a glitterboy, just as an environmentally sealed armored military car would be protected even though it is a car which would normally be affected.
- all power armors have radar unless otherwise stated. see RUE page 271, "Power Armor", point number 2.

[Nomadic]

Radar Accepted. But the Vechicle thing is a bit weaker, Anything used by the Military could be a Military Wechicle and I don't think a Willie would be Protected

But after reading point 7, I would agree.. Still needs some clarification.

[Lenwen]

[quote="jaymz"]The ywon;t be deaf as they are in side a environmentally sealed Power Armour. Sonic Boom will not deafen them.[quote]
Either thier PA allows them enhanced hearing which in fact would defen them in the advent of a Boom gun going off and all penalties would be applied ..

Or thier PA does not grant them advanced hearing .. in which case .. thier is no penalty for them when the Boom gun goes off near them.

You can not have it both ways ..

That would not be logical.

[jaymz]

News to me that they grant enhanced hearing. Also this woudl be applicable to them being beside the GB. I was never ana dvocate of getting to melee range with a GB. My position has always been with proper tactics 3 Sams shoudl be able to outmanuever the GB and win the fight. Easily? No and likely two of them will end up dead or damn near close to it. But most of the scenarios presented on this thread seem to indicate the Sam pilots a raw recruits with a deficient IQ.

[Lenwen]

But most of the scenarios presented on this thread seem to indicate the Sam pilots a raw recruits with a deficient IQ.

It seems like they do this to the side they want to lose ..

[Mack]

The ywon;t be deaf as they are in side a environmentally sealed Power Armour. Sonic Boom will not deafen them.

Either thier PA allows them enhanced hearing which in fact would defen them in the advent of a Boom gun going off and all penalties would be applied ..

Or thier PA does not grant them advanced hearing .. in which case .. thier is no penalty for them when the Boom gun goes off near them.

You can not have it both ways ..

That would not be logical.

Actually, he can have it both in Rifts. Read the description of the Sound Filtration System on RUE p51.

[Lenwen]

The ywon;t be deaf as they are in side a environmentally sealed Power Armour. Sonic Boom will not deafen them.

Either thier PA allows them enhanced hearing which in fact would defen them in the advent of a Boom gun going off and all penalties would be applied ..

Or thier PA does not grant them advanced hearing .. in which case .. thier is no penalty for them when the Boom gun goes off near them.

You can not have it both ways ..

That would not be logical.

Actually, he can have it both in Rifts. Read the description of the Sound Filtration System on RUE p51.

Your talking about a Bionic system.

Are we not talking about Power Armors ?

Are they not totally different things ?

[Mack]

The ywon;t be deaf as they are in side a environmentally sealed Power Armour. Sonic Boom will not deafen them.

Either thier PA allows them enhanced hearing which in fact would defen them in the advent of a Boom gun going off and all penalties would be applied ..

Or thier PA does not grant them advanced hearing .. in which case .. thier is no penalty for them when the Boom gun goes off near them.

You can not have it both ways ..

That would not be logical.

Actually, he can have it both in Rifts. Read the description of the Sound Filtration System on RUE p51.

Your talking about a Bionic system.

Are we not talking about Power Armors ?

Are they not totally different things ?

No, they're not totally different things. They're both techology based methods of hearing. There's no reason to presume that an integrated bionic system is capable of something an integrated power armor system is not.

However, there's a much better arguement to be used here, but I'll let you find it.