Tom Clancy's Endwar Earth ISOT to BattleTech.

[Spartan303]

Figured I'd toss this one out there as its been rattling around in my head for a few days.

Tom Clancy's Endwar Earth, just before WW3 kicked off. Earth is ISOT'd to the BattleTech universe and replaces the world of Sacromonte.

This is literally a few weeks just after the coup and Kamea is on the run to Canopis but her Jump ship is pulled out in Earths system and the jump drive heavily damaged. Massive radio traffic emanating from the planet confuses Kamea and the crew, which is only further compounded by optical telescopes clearly showing a beautiful and pristine world and not a brown rock. Rather than wait until repairs are complete, which could take weeks, Kamea and Alexander opt to visit this new world and try to understand this new mystery, but they are detected coming closer to Earth.

This...puts everything on hold on the planet. All march towards a world war 3 just stops in its tracks and allows cooler heads to prevail. Kamea and Alexander are stunned by what they see. A bustling and thriving world, rich in resources, industry and technology. And a potential ally...if they can play their cards right, or so Alexander will claim. Kamea wants none of it though, She wants them as an ally sure, but doesn't have the time or resources to uplift them technologically. Nor does she want the guilt and responsibility of drawing innocent people into her war. Alexander paints a different picture. There is no way the Directorate is going to allow such a rich and industrialized world to just sit unmolested practically on their doorstep. They're going to invade and try to take it. This world is literally everything Santiago Espanosa could ever want to rebuild the Reach and expand it. It has abundant resources, technology and industry, a strong planetary economy and smart and skillful people. It hasn't lost anything from the succession wars. Infact, it has quite a few things even the Star League didn't have. There is no way he'd pass it up. And if by some miracle he did, the local pirates wouldn't.

Thus begins a 'Game of Thrones' in space with Kamea, and later Cantrella trying to woo Earth to their Cause, while the Directorate becomes wise to the planet and makes plans of their own. The Successor states are too distracted by their own affairs to really get involved, but not Comstar. Thus we have our story.

Note: There will be no existing prior knowledge of BattleTech on Endwar Earth. BattleTech the Tabletop game or any of its spinoff materials never took place here. So Earth doesn't have magical foreknowledge that will propel them ahead. They've just been dropped in at the deep end and must now survive a very hostile galaxy.

Thoughts?

 

[PsihoKekec]

What is a relation between the Endwar and BattleTech tech? OTL the 21st century rounds could barely scratch the BattleMech armor. Within tabletop rules the Rh-120 is considered a Medium Rifle with same range as AC-10, but can inflict only 3 damage against Battlemech, compared to 10 of AC-10. Now the Endwar factions do have numbers, but that doesn't count outside the world, due to transportation bottlenecks.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Are we using canonical BT ranges here? 'Cause the Clancyverse is going to have a hearty laugh at 700 yards being a "long-range" attack before pelting any offending BattleMechs with Tomahawk missiles from below the horizon.

On a combat front Endwar is basically going to be Ewoks against AT-ST. They have a ridiculous numerical disparity (The US has as many tanks as the SLDF would consider appropriate for ongoing combat on 30-100 planets, the SLDF mind you), but will have trouble inflicting much damage with anything but the biggest weapons. They also have basically zero answer to orbital bombardment, now granted the Great Houses don't have ships capable of that anymore but ComStar does.

Which, unfortunately, is how I see things going. Without any OOC knowledge of ComStar they're quite likely to accept ComStar's attitude and excellent reputation for charity and neutrality at face value and let them in. Endwar Earth's immediate goal is going to be teaching up their factories to BT Standard and given how many factories they have compared to BT, they'll wind up a powerhouse to rival Terra itself. At that point ComStar will either have precentors in a good position to quietly assume control, or ComStar will see the handwriting on the wall and make sure this bizarrely over-industrialized over-armed over-populated garden world quits existing.

 

[Spartan303]

Are we using canonical BT ranges here? 'Cause the Clancyverse is going to have a hearty laugh at 700 yards being a "long-range" attack before pelting any offending BattleMechs with Tomahawk missiles from below the horizon.

On a combat front Endwar is basically going to be Ewoks against AT-ST. They have a ridiculous numerical disparity (The US has as many tanks as the SLDF would consider appropriate for ongoing combat on 30-100 planets, the SLDF mind you), but will have trouble inflicting much damage with anything but the biggest weapons. They also have basically zero answer to orbital bombardment, now granted the Great Houses don't have ships capable of that anymore but ComStar does.

Which, unfortunately, is how I see things going. Without any OOC knowledge of ComStar they're quite likely to accept ComStar's attitude and excellent reputation for charity and neutrality at face value and let them in. Endwar Earth's immediate goal is going to be teaching up their factories to BT Standard and given how many factories they have compared to BT, they'll wind up a powerhouse to rival Terra itself. At that point ComStar will either have precentors in a good position to quietly assume control, or ComStar will see the handwriting on the wall and make sure this bizarrely over-industrialized over-armed over-populated garden world quits existing.

Obviously, its plot determined, but fairly close to BTech canon. Earth tanks will have pretty abysmal showing in a straight up fight. But they can engage from Range, but that'll be a lesson they learn in blood. Air Support is going to be the bane of any attacking force. The Battlemechs will die the death of a thousand bee stings and small caliber hits. Good thing for Earth is that they have the troops to play that game, they have the skill to leverage their advantages and negate the enemies and they're on their homefield advantage.

 

[King Arts]

Are we using canonical BT ranges here? 'Cause the Clancyverse is going to have a hearty laugh at 700 yards being a "long-range" attack before pelting any offending BattleMechs with Tomahawk missiles from below the horizon.

On a combat front Endwar is basically going to be Ewoks against AT-ST. They have a ridiculous numerical disparity (The US has as many tanks as the SLDF would consider appropriate for ongoing combat on 30-100 planets, the SLDF mind you), but will have trouble inflicting much damage with anything but the biggest weapons. They also have basically zero answer to orbital bombardment, now granted the Great Houses don't have ships capable of that anymore but ComStar does.

Which, unfortunately, is how I see things going. Without any OOC knowledge of ComStar they're quite likely to accept ComStar's attitude and excellent reputation for charity and neutrality at face value and let them in. Endwar Earth's immediate goal is going to be teaching up their factories to BT Standard and given how many factories they have compared to BT, they'll wind up a powerhouse to rival Terra itself. At that point ComStar will either have precentors in a good position to quietly assume control, or ComStar will see the handwriting on the wall and make sure this bizarrely over-industrialized over-armed over-populated garden world quits existing.

While they don't have Warships. Can't regular Jump Ships be used to bring in other ships that could push asteroids to be used as orbital artillery?

 

[Spartan303]

@S'task and @bullethead

 

[Knowledgeispower]

While they don't have Warships. Can't regular Jump Ships be used to bring in other ships that could push asteroids to be used as orbital artillery?

Errr no one in Battletech does that. Hell they don't even use Rods from God.

 

[King Arts]

Errr no one in Battletech does that. Hell they don't even use Rods from God.

I'm assuming that's due to morals/treaties not tech limitations right? Because if you are in space, umm anyone would be able to strap engines on a big rock and point it where you want to go.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

I'm assuming that's due to morals/treaties not tech limitations right? Because if you are in space, umm anyone would be able to strap engines on a big rock and point it where you want to go.

Moreso due to everyone not liking WMDs at all in this era due to the whole entire worlds dying the last time they got used. There's no formal agreement in place anymore but everyone follows the Ares Conventions for the most part for practical reasons like not ending interstellar civilization.

 

[King Arts]

Moreso due to everyone not liking WMDs at all in this era due to the whole entire worlds dying the last time they got used. There's no formal agreement in place anymore but everyone follows the Ares Conventions for the most part for practical reasons like not ending interstellar civilization.

Yes so I was right morals/treaty. Just like we could have "won" Afghanistan by using all the nukes, but did not because of morality and politics. Battletech uses small armies of nobles and giant robots and refrains from WMD's and planetary bombardment because they don't want to escalate.

 

[Bear Ribs]

While they don't have Warships. Can't regular Jump Ships be used to bring in other ships that could push asteroids to be used as orbital artillery?

In theory, but only the Word of Blake was ever able to pull it off, and then only a couple of times. My personal headcanon is that because this would require several months of running said DropShips, requiring vast amounts of food and fuel in the process, which has to be done far enough out-system that nobody can see the drive plumes and move to counter them (Including being able topower the JumpShip without its sail due to begin so far away), it's simply too difficult and expensive for anybody who doesn't have resources to burn the way the Blakists and Star League did.

Throwing Asteroids is one of those Spacebattles Competence ideas that glosses over the massive logistics tail needed to actually move a rock the size of a state around.

 

[Spartan303]

Why can't they power Jump drives from the Reactor?

 

[Knowledgeispower]

Why can't they power Jump drives from the Reactor?

They can and do but the charge rate is normally roughly the same as sails unless you want to risk a misjump especially on older less well maintained Jumpships. And the whole solar sails don't need any money in the form of wear and tear and fuel to use

 

[Bear Ribs]

Why can't they power Jump drives from the Reactor?

You can but, due to FASAnomics, doing so requires an insane amount of fuel. Outside of the primitives that existed before sails, few JumpShips actually have enough fuel to do so, so you have to devote a collar to having an Aqueduct or similar as a fuel tanker. 'Course you're also going to need several Aqueducts to fuel the DropShips spending weeks trying to push a Texas-sized rock around.

 

[S'task]

Are we using canonical BT ranges here? 'Cause the Clancyverse is going to have a hearty laugh at 700 yards being a "long-range" attack before pelting any offending BattleMechs with Tomahawk missiles from below the horizon.

This is a bugbear that needs to die.

BattleTech "canon" ranges are no such thing. The actual rules state that BattleTech weapons would either to to the horizon (for direct fire weapons) or beyond the horizon for indirect fire. The ranges as presented in the tabletop game are truncated for gameplay purposes.

At least, that's the stated canon in the most recent rulebooks. It should be noted that these same rulebooks have rules for relativistic space combat as well, which amount to "put both ship record sheets in a shredder and whichever is shredded first is the loser" because BattleTech, unlike a lot of SF, is actually passingly familiar with physics and seeks to make is abundantly clear that it purposefully is ignoring certain things for gameplay reasons and that the ACTUAL TECH would be capable of a lot more.

Then there's the OTHER option, which is that ranges are so truncated in BattleTech because their IW (information warfare) systems are so hostile and active that they literally block anything longer range from being able to get a lock on things. This is actually somewhat supported by how better sensors and computers actually make it easier to hit things even if there's no active jamming systems on enemy targets. If this is the case, then no, EndWar's weapons will not have any real range advantage, and may even be SHORTER range than similar BattleTech weapons.

Also Cruise missiles are a known weapon in BattleTech, they're not used because a single AMS basically screws them.

 

[Bear Ribs]

This is a bugbear that needs to die.

BattleTech "canon" ranges are no such thing. The actual rules state that BattleTech weapons would either to to the horizon (for direct fire weapons) or beyond the horizon for indirect fire. The ranges as presented in the tabletop game are truncated for gameplay purposes.

At least, that's the stated canon in the most recent rulebooks. It should be noted that these same rulebooks have rules for relativistic space combat as well, which amount to "put both ship record sheets in a shredder and whichever is shredded first is the loser" because BattleTech, unlike a lot of SF, is actually passingly familiar with physics and seeks to make is abundantly clear that it purposefully is ignoring certain things for gameplay reasons and that the ACTUAL TECH would be capable of a lot more.

Phelan stared at the computer projection of the range and damage done to the Panther. Seven hundred meters for a large laser! impossible! They can only hit at 450 max. He hit a button that opened a tight channel between him and Hound Leader. -Lethal Heritage, chapter 8

She brought her ’Mech to a stop at the targeting range’s firing line. Bringing the Kit Fox alongside her, Phelan studied the range. He immediately punched up double magnification on his vislight scan. “I mark targets out at 300 meters. I know these weapons can do it because I saw Vlad take out some targets at this range and beyond.” -Blood Legacy, chapter 10

Perhaps text isn't your thing. How about visuals?


At around the 2 minute mark we can see that they can't even detect the Mad Cat until it's within a few hundred yards, it "has them ranged" and in less than ten seconds it's walked up to them, which unless the Mad Cat's speed is also being retconned as competing with the Flash makes those extreme weapon ranges impossible.

Fact is BT lore is quite consistent that the ranges are measured in hundreds of meters. And, of course, here's one other big clue:

Expending a large amount of limited weaponry resources on a giant axe is considered a viable front-line option and it's successful across decades of combat. Indeed there are a number of units, like the Vibro-Claw Kage variant, that have no ranged ability at all and only fight in melee. This is extremely telling as this strategy would not be viable if ranges weren't so short that closing to melee range was relatively easy. We don't go around equipping Abrams with wrecking balls as a standard design because ranges are so low that tanks engaging in melee is a valid concern, nor deploy infantry with no guns using only swords, but we see both of those options being used and viable all over the place in canon.

Then there's the OTHER option, which is that ranges are so truncated in BattleTech because their IW (information warfare) systems are so hostile and active that they literally block anything longer range from being able to get a lock on things. This is actually somewhat supported by how better sensors and computers actually make it easier to hit things even if there's no active jamming systems on enemy targets. If this is the case, then no, EndWar's weapons will not have any real range advantage, and may even be SHORTER range than similar BattleTech weapons.

You can't have it both ways, one or the other of these could be true but they're incompatible with each other. We're arguing canon in a vs. debate, not fan speculation for a story where I'd agree with the reasoning and modify ranges to be more reasonable. We have to go with the canon in this forum, and the fact that you present two incompatible theories in the same post is pretty telling about how much canon backing you actually have.

Additionally, the sensors making it easier to hit doesn't prove your point, in fact it directly contradicts it. If range was linked to sensor capacity, improving it via those sensors would make ranges go up. But it doesn't, the severe range limitations appear to be a quality of the weapon and while better sensors can make them more accurate, they can't make them shoot further.

Also Cruise missiles are a known weapon in BattleTech, they're not used because a single AMS basically screws them.

Arrow IV is not screwed up by a single AMS and they're widely used, though they're also dramatically shorter-ranged than Tomahawks. The actual weapon they call a Cruise Missile, which acts more like an old Soviet Scud, is also not rarely used due to being vulnerable to AMS.

The modern tactical cruise missile artillery platforms being developed are effectively heavily modified versions of the Arrow IV launch system, but boast much greater range and damage potential at a significant loss in accuracy. -Tactical Operations page 284

They're rarely used because they're highly inaccurate.

 

[S'task]

Fact is BT lore is quite consistent that the ranges are measured in hundreds of meters. And, of course, here's one other big clue:

You know what supercedes fiction in BattleTech?

Hard rules:

BattleTech Total Warfare Page 42 - "A Note on Scale and the Rules":

... However, players should note that such "real world" terms are abstractions when applied to the board game. BattleTech is a game, not a detailed simulation. Therefore, the real world must take a back seat to game play--for simplicity, length of play, space required and simple enjoyment.

...


Weapon ranges provide another example. Players will quickly realize that the longest-range standard weapon in the game can only hit targets out to thirty hexes (900 meters) from the attacker. Real-world primary main battle tank weapons have operational targeting ranges in excess of 4,000 meters. Because BattleTech map-sheets are only seventeen hexes long, recreating real-wrold ranges on a table would require more than seven mapsheets laid end to end, for a playing space greater than twelve feet in length. Not many people have that type of table space, nor would it provide players with any tactical maneuvering room. Anywhere a player might move a unit on the map, an attack could hit that unit.

So my first explanation - that ranges are truncated for game play purposes - is actually the CANON REASON given in the most recent CORE RULEBOOK for the game.

And yes, I'm fully aware they are mutually exclusive reasons, perhaps you misunderstood what I was doing. I was providing two different explanations for the shortened ranges that led to two different ways that BattleTech could interact in this scenario. The first, which is arguably more canon to the rules, would mean that BattleTech weapons have the same logical range as they have in the "real world" and thus the ranges should be increased to what they logically should be given the technology. The second reasons approaches it from the other direction, giving an in universe reason for the short ranges and stating that thus the Endwar Earth's ranges should be similarly truncated.

As to missile systems, yes, the optional rules in Tactical Operations mention them as you note, but you ignored the rules text for AMS in the base rules, which basically gives any single-shot missile a 50/50 chance against a single AMS. I can find nothing saying that Arrow IV and Cruise missiles are immune to AMS, as such, they should fall under the single-shot weapon rule. If that's the case, a single AMS giving them a 50/50 chance as successfully hitting a unit does, in fact, make them near ineffective.

 

[Bear Ribs]

You know what supercedes fiction in BattleTech?

Hard rules:

BattleTech Total Warfare Page 42 - "A Note on Scale and the Rules":


So my first explanation - that ranges are truncated for game play purposes - is actually the CANON REASON given in the most recent CORE RULEBOOK for the game.

Hmmm.... know what I'm not seeing in that quote? Hard rules. Also I'm not seeing anything saying what their ranges are or even that they're longer than. They say "Real World" ranges are longer than BT ranges and admit it's illogical, but fail to say that actual BT ranges would match that, only that their ranges are shorter. Those are not Hard Rules, they're the devs admitting the rules of BT short-ranged.

While you're at it I'd like to see your citation from a line developer claiming that rules supercede fiction, as far as I know omniscient narrator fiction is normally considered the highest canon, certainly that's Sarna's policy. Where are you getting this from?

Lastly, if you want to pull out hard rules, I can just point at the hard rule that hexes are 30 meters and the longest-ranged weapon in the game (besides artillery, and space of course uses different ranges) can only hit at 30 hexes max. I was trying to play fair with you and look at the higher-canon fluff to give you a chance, but if you want to play the hard rules card you lose instantly. Good job.

And yes, I'm fully aware they are mutually exclusive reasons, perhaps you misunderstood what I was doing. I was providing two different explanations for the shortened ranges that led to two different ways that BattleTech could interact in this scenario. The first, which is arguably more canon to the rules, would mean that BattleTech weapons have the same logical range as they have in the "real world" and thus the ranges should be increased to what they logically should be given the technology. The second reasons approaches it from the other direction, giving an in universe reason for the short ranges and stating that thus the Endwar Earth's ranges should be similarly truncated.

As to missile systems, yes, the optional rules in Tactical Operations mention them as you note, but you ignored the rules text for AMS in the base rules, which basically gives any single-shot missile a 50/50 chance against a single AMS. I can find nothing saying that Arrow IV and Cruise missiles are immune to AMS, as such, they should fall under the single-shot weapon rule. If that's the case, a single AMS giving them a 50/50 chance as successfully hitting a unit does, in fact, make them near ineffective.

Not sure why you can't find those rules, AMS can't engage Arrow IV and Cruise Missiles because per the rules, they are not missile weapons but artillery, and AMS explicitly can't engage artillery. AMS also can't engage mortars for the same reason, mortars are technically not missile weapons. This has been the case all the way since the Master Rules and has never changed, load up a game of Megamek and see how well your AMS works against them (Hint: it will do nothing.)

That said, again, I'm not using the hard rules for any of my arguments because they automatically win for my side here.

And again, you're posting mutually contradictory theories, I'm presenting canon. Show me your canon examples of an LRM hitting a target twenty miles away, even say a barn or something to facilitate your ECM theory, and you'll have some traction.

 

[S'task]

While you're at it I'd like to see your citation from a line developer claiming that rules supercede fiction, as far as I know omniscient narrator fiction is normally considered the highest canon, certainly that's Sarna's policy. Where are you getting this from?

Total Warfare pg 15 - "Fiction vs Rules" "It is import to note that fictions, though essential in the making the game universe come alive, should never be construed as rules. While BattleTech fiction usually attempts to adhere to the aesthetics established by the rules, authors often use creative license to accomplish the needs of a given story."

Thus if fiction presentation conflicts with rules presentation, rules take precedent, at least, that's how I read that.

Lastly, if you want to pull out hard rules, I can just point at the hard rule that hexes are 30 meters and the longest-ranged weapon in the game (besides artillery, and space of course uses different ranges) can only hit at 30 hexes max. I was trying to play fair with you and look at the higher-canon fluff to give you a chance, but if you want to play the hard rules card you lose instantly. Good job.

I mean... Hard Rules don't disfavor longer ranges?

When it comes to scale, weapons ranges are always the same number of hexes regardless of the scale of the hex as far as I can find. People conventionally use the ground hex to scale BattleTech weapons to, because that's what most people play with and what the fiction tends to be written with to maintain the feel of BattleTech; however, there are TWO OTHER size hexes in BattleTech, Space Hexes and Atmospheric Hexes. Both are much larger with an Atmospheric hex being 500 meters and Spaces Hexes being 18 Kilometers. While the 18 Kilometer range is clearly not logical as you're dealing with the difference between actual SPACE and on a planet, that Atmospheric hexes are so much longer range tends to call into question the short range of those weapons when mounted on Mechs as opposed to Aerospace fighters. I mean, the rules reason for the difference is simple: different scaling for gameplay purposes and to make thing work smoothly; however, it's nonsensical that a weapon when mounted on a Mech will suddenly gain so much range just because it's mounted on an Aerospace fighter.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Total Warfare pg 15 - "Fiction vs Rules" "It is import to note that fictions, though essential in the making the game universe come alive, should never be construed as rules. While BattleTech fiction usually attempts to adhere to the aesthetics established by the rules, authors often use creative license to accomplish the needs of a given story."

Thus if fiction presentation conflicts with rules presentation, rules take precedent, at least, that's how I read that.

How the utter heck do you read "Fiction should never be construed as rules" and pull "therefore rules override fiction" out of that?

And what's your answer to "If we use the rules a large laser can't hit a target beyond 450 meters, just as it can't in the books?"

I mean... Hard Rules don't disfavor longer ranges?

When it comes to scale, weapons ranges are always the same number of hexes regardless of the scale of the hex as far as I can find. People conventionally use the ground hex to scale BattleTech weapons to, because that's what most people play with and what the fiction tends to be written with to maintain the feel of BattleTech; however, there are TWO OTHER size hexes in BattleTech, Space Hexes and Atmospheric Hexes. Both are much larger with an Atmospheric hex being 500 meters and Spaces Hexes being 18 Kilometers. While the 18 Kilometer range is clearly not logical as you're dealing with the difference between actual SPACE and on a planet, that Atmospheric hexes are so much longer range tends to call into question the short range of those weapons when mounted on Mechs as opposed to Aerospace fighters. I mean, the rules reason for the difference is simple: different scaling for gameplay purposes and to make thing work smoothly; however, it's nonsensical that a weapon when mounted on a Mech will suddenly gain so much range just because it's mounted on an Aerospace fighter.

It's nonsensical but also exactly how things work. It's nonsensical that bigger autocannons have a shorter range than smaller ones, and nonsensical that the entire Inner Sphere has less total shipping tonnage combined than the modern Great Lakes do. However, that's also... wait for it... your desired hard rules.

According to your own notions, it's canon. Just as Harry Potter magic is nonsensical, but in a vs. debate we still go off how it works. You don't get to discount it in a vs. debate because waving a stick and saying "Avada Kedavra" won't kill a person in real life. You don't get to claim that being bitten by a radioactive spider in real life won't give you superpowers so Spider-Man must be a regular guy. Most especially, you don't get to have your cake and eat it too. You don't get to claim that "hard rules" override everything else and then ignore hard rules wherever you think it would hurt your side in the debate be "Nonsensical."

Now if you want to ignore the hard rules, as I did as a courtesy to you, well fine, but then you run into the fact that visuals and fiction, as I've pointed out, also confirm those ranges. Again, you've got no examples of an LRM hitting a stationary target with no possible ECM, such as my example of a barn, from twenty miles away. Further justifications like "ECM heavy environment" don't fit what we see, if the weaponry is actually to the horizon and ECM is reducing it due to sensor interference, why does it reduce a small laser to so much shorter a range than a large laser or PPC? Wouldn't all the weaponry be at the max range the sensors can reach? Why does sensor jamming make an AC/20 have way shorter ranges than an AC/2? Why does loading giant shotgun shells into an Autocannon make it suddenly have a much longer range? Does enemy ECM notice you loaded an LBX with cluster instead of a standard AC with regular shells and accommodatingly reduce its effectiveness so the LBX can shoot further? Why does rifling the barrel cause a weapon to do less damage to 'mechs but the same damage to other targets? It's all nonsensical but also all the hard rules.

And again again, there's no logical way a Hatchetman or Eyrie should be viable combat platforms using melee primary weapons in a world where ranges are anywhere near real-world.