Rules preview: building your company

[MikeDamrat]

I don't think the attacking rules have changed since Mechaton. Even with split weapon systems, you declare what range you will be attacking at, and only add red dice to your roll that are valid at that range.

For instance, if I have one weapon system, and it is split between Direct Fire and Hand-to-Hand, when I roll dice for that mech, I would declare either Direct Fire or Hand-to-Hand before rolling, and only roll 1 red die. If I fail to be in the appropriate range, I fail the attack.

[Axhead]

I think Mike has it right. The good news on picking which range you are going to shoot at, is that Direct and Artillery are both very broad so it is easy to get in them. The only issue is if you want to Melee and get a crap white/green roll.

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

Yeah, you declare a range, not a system. It's better for you anyway: that way if you have a pistol (1Rh, 1Rd) and a carbine (2Rd) you get to roll 3 reds at Direct range.

There is, in fact, a mistake in my calculations above: in one of them I'm assuming a defense of 0 (which happens once or twice a game, tops) and in the other I'm assuming a defense of 1 (which happens much more often).

In any event, you guys understood it fine.

[Spiralbound]

For your stations, you can build anything that's stationary and valuable to defend or seize. A downed satellite, a drop ship, a cache of medical supplies, a research facility's data storage drives, a truck with a flat tire and a load of fresh peaches. Whatever.

A mobile frame is made of a frame and attached systems. A frame can carry at most 4 systems, and at most 2 systems of any given type, but is otherwise allowed to carry any mix of systems you want.

There are six types of systems:
Defensive systems: armor, a shield, camoflage, stealth composite surfacing, ECM.
Movement systems: jumpjets, wings, wheels.
Surveillance/communications systems: a radio, a targeting laser, spotlights, a rifle scope.
Hand-to-hand weapon systems: a shock baton, a combat knife, a repurposed jackhammer.
Direct fire weapon systems: an assault rifle, a grenade launcher, a flamethrower, a beam weapon.
Artillery range weapon systems: a mortar, a sniper rifle, a railgun.

Is it possible to have a Station with systems? I'm imagining a Company that includes a base with armor, comms, or defensive guns. A bunker with , an artillery pillbox with , or an Ops Centre with ? The number of systems devoted to a Station could be deducted from the available number of systems for your Company. Would this work or would it cause problems?

[Ced23Ric]

Is it possible to have a Station with systems?

In the current balancing, a spotting station would be huge, because you cannot attack it (not a 'Frame, nor is it meant to be destroyed). Holding it is easier than taking it (due to the inherent firepower advantage of spotting), putting the defender at a massive advantage.

This is something I'd houserule, to try it out in actual gameplay, and toy around with destructability. See where you end up. Maybe it'll come in a later campaign installment of the rules!

[Dukayn]

Regarding stations with systems, maybe you can shoot at it while the systems are active, but once it is destroyed, it reverts back to normal rules (as there's nothing left to shoot at).

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

That means that there's a frame guarding it.

I'm not totally against the idea; just use the "everyone gets them" principle, à la .

Think about the effect it will have on the gameplay when you're doing something like this. Don't just think about the color. Does it change the way you play? Good! Does it encourage daring, aggressive play, or hanging back? If the former, good! If the latter, baaad.

Right now, it's pretty hard to get objectives anyway. This definitely seems like it will make objective grabbing less attractive and turn the game into straight-up dude-killin'. Since the player in last place usually has to do a lot of killin' anyway, further disincentivizing the capturing of objectives doesn't seem like a good way to go.