Source
r/battletech•
Perqq

Alpha strike OV and weapon hit interaction question

Tabletop

Hello :) I've been playing some Alpha Strike recently, and I have a question that doesn't seem to be addressed in the rules (Commander's Edition) - how does OV and weapon hit critical effect interact?

As far as I understand OV value represents actual weapon loadout on the mech that can be used to deal damage, but requires to overheat (simply because there are too many guns compared to amount of heat sinks).
Then comes the weapon hit critical that causes -1 damage done. In my opinion it should simply decrease the OV by one, until it becomes zero, and then start to dig into "base" values (those that doesn't require overheat to fire).
But it doesn't seem to be addressed in the rules anywhere, it simply states that this OV can be used to deal more damage.

Have any of you considered this while playing Alpha Strike, or maybe I've missed that in rules?

Posted Nov 30, 2023, 9:02 AM UTC

537
SCCOJake•

If you want to house rule it, go for it, but the way a mechs damage is calculated isn't as simple as that. OV is representing the damage a Mech can generate beyond its ability to cool the heat from firing all of its weapons in a single turn. But it's not just that if a Mech can generate ANY heat beyond its ability to cool, you have to generate a significant amount, and this also considers the mechs movement including jumping, regardless of it the mech actually moved or not. The -1 damage is already a huge reduction in damage, but because it's flattened is not able to account for the change in heat gen. OV is a trade off, you get an extra point (or more) for moving up the heat scale, which had its own consequences.

Tldr: you don't need to apply the -1 to both regular and OV damage, that's not how it's intended to be applied, but you do you and whatever you and your opponent agree to is the right way to play.

6
PerqqOP•

I think you misunderstood (or I did not explain it well enough). I'm suggesting that when you take weapon hit (and therefore have -1 damage), you subtract that from potential OV first, and only when the OV gets depleted to 0.
Point is that if you're weapons get destroyed you won't be able to overhead since you don't have enough guns to do so. Subtracting from base values first (as manual implies, I assume, and some posters here) means that you fire less guns, but still overhead it the process (which doesn't make any sense since there is no source of that heat).
The engine being damaged and generating heat is already covered in engine hit critical, so I assume there is no reasonable way of assuming damage to anything but weapons.

1
SCCOJake•

I understand the logic, but it's still not how weapon damage and OV actually work in AS. Again, you can play however you want, I'm not trying to police your fun.

4
PerqqOP•

I'm actually not sure why it doesn't work like that. Especially when you try to include rules like Forced Withdrawal - how do you interpret that?
Would the unit start fleeing when they reach 0/0/0, even if they have OV? Because if they have OV, they didn't run out of fire power.
And if weapon hit cannot reduce OV in any way, it means that if unit has any OV, it cannot be reduced to 0 for forced withdrawal.
And if it can, ignoring OV, then the unit will be fleeing because "it has no firepower left", while the player may be deciding to... fire using OV.

To me it only seems logical to do it that way (ignoring the other practical reasons how mech, weapons and cooling down works), not doing it that way creates a lot of problem with other rules.

-1
SCCOJake•

I'm pretty sure you can't use OV if you have a base damage of 0, it ADDS to damage, it's not damage in its own.

4
SCCOJake•

Sorry for being abrupt, I was on my way out the door. To elaborate a bit:

AS flattens a lot of the rules in its abstraction. A weapon hit on a non OV Mech reduces its damage by 1 right? Is intended to be a major blow to the mech and represent significant damage. If the only thing you do to a Mech with an OV is reduce the OV rating then you aren't actually doing much. Mechs with an OV have had their base damage reduced due to heat, but that's usually not a major change, a point or two in most cases, and the difference is the OV. But OV is an OPTION for the player, they don't HAVE to use OV in an attack, so reducing it isn't as big a deal as reducing the base attack, which is what a weapon hit is soar to be. If it helps, think of the weapon hit as also taking out other systems like heat sinks and so the OV and OV reduced base damage are going down together.

You don't force a player to use OV with each attack so reducing it isn't as much a threat as reduced base damage. And it would mean you could effecting pad you force by taking mechs with an OV rating as a "free" crit vs a non-OV Mech that just gets a flat base damage reduction.

6
PerqqOP•

Is intended to be a major blow to the mech and represent significant damage.
Not if the base damage on a mech is 5. 1 point of damage on such mech is nothing.
If your base damage is 2, a single weapon hit will cut your damage in half.
If it helps, think of the weapon hit as also taking out other systems like heat sinks and so the OV and OV reduced base damage are going down together.
Would that mean that other mechs would have to shift their base damage to OV? If we assume that both are to be damaged, should they be both be damaged in case of any mech, be it one having OV or not?
Point is that if we make such assumptions they're directly affecting ONLY mechs with OV.

I think that you're missing a point that OV value is base damage. It simply carries a penalty of having to overheat to use it.
Losing OV as weapon hit doesn't mean its "free", you're losing guns still.
Compared mechs with OV values to ones that doesn't have them and you'll see that most of the mechs that have OV values have lower base damage.
It isn't "free damage", its damage with penalties.
Example: Loki Prime and Kingfisher I, similar PV.
One has 4/4/4 and OV 3 (so 7/7/4 total) and 8 total durability the other has 5/5/2 and 16 total durability (with one point more in armor, which is better). One less TMM, 2 less move.
So if we are to assume that OV is a "bonus", then all Loki has is 2 more damage in long range, 1 TMM and 2 move.
For 3 more PV you get double durability, 1 more damage in short and medium range.

-1
SCCOJake•

In a game where 2 to 3 damage is pretty standard for most units, yeah a1 point reduction is a big deal. The 4s and 5s are outliers, or represent mostly clan tech which is supposed to be over powered.

Don't be absurd about shifting damage to OV after a weapon hit. You are being intentionally obtuse, if you actually read what I said it makes sense, any weapon hit could be argued to reduce a similar level of cooling, this would remove the need to adjust damage and possibly create an OV level.

OV is only base damage in that is the damage removed after heat adjustment. It's NOT base damage because it's applied separately from base damage.

The 4/4/4 OV Mech is a less efficient heat management Mech, that helps account for the difference. OV is a part of the PV calculation, so I really don't know what you're on about.

The idea of a weapon hit crit impacting only base damage is a balance, yes an OV Mech can still output more damage, but only if it accepts the heat. Your banged up OV Mech just had more guns (and movement) than its heat sinks can keep up with.

5
ErrantOwl•

OP is making the classic mistake (buh dum, ching) of thinking that AS is supposed to mirror CBT rules throughout different aspects of play. It doesn't. It's a different game.

I'm particular, the whole "base damage" thing throughout this thread is a red herring. After the conversion is done, the AS rules don't aim to continue referencing the CBT rules. The aim is for similar feel, that's all.

Having actually played a substantial amount of AS (as its own game), I can reassure OP that the weapon hit critical effect works just fine as written, including in its interaction with OV.

But it if still bothers you for any reason? Play your way. That's fine. Go ham! (But don't tell others that the way they're playing is irrational when actual experience shows that the current rule for weapon crits works just fine in their experience.)

6
PerqqOP•

Not trying to tell anyone to play what I think is "correct" (because there is no correct), but I don't really get many rationale behind "why" these are good ways to play, just that it is "the way to play".
I've played some games and it doesn't seem "fine" for the reasons mentioned.

1
synthmemory•

The rule you're proposing is essentially a great way to ignore the impact of the critical hit you've sustained. If you lose points to your OV value rather than your damage value, there's 0 penalty to a player who chooses not to use their OV value. That's not the way the game was intended to play and I doubt very many people would agree with you that it's also how it "should" be played. I would definitely not agree to this rule, you're taking a philosophical rule stance and turning it into quite a large cheat

4
PerqqOP•

I've explained why it is not "ignoring impact" of critical hits and I haven't seen a compelling argument against it (yet).
tl;dr: Mechs with OV tend to have less base damage, so essentially having anything as OV is penalty in itself - if mech had more heatsinks, this damage would just be in normal brackets (and looking though lots of different mech variants this seems to be the case). But because it doesn't, you can only use it by applying penalties to yourself. This is especially bad with mechs that have small base damage values paired with bigger OV.

Its not philosophical, I'm presenting reasoning why I think what I think. You're free to think I want to cheat, though it kinda makes it look like you have some sort of personal emotional connection to that rule (which is weird tbh) since instead of arguing why it is good to be that way, you're trying to argue against me (calling me a cheater).

1
synthmemory•

I've read all of your responses and none of them address the fact that marking down OV poses no penalty to a player who chooses not to use OV. A universal penalty such as those imposed by crits, in my opinion, must ALWAYS impact a player in a game like AS that's designed to be played more quickly as a streamlined version of a more complicated rules. A critical has to carry weight for it to matter, ie MP criticals ALWAYS impact movement, fire control criticals ALWAYS impact firing.

I'm not calling you a cheater, I'm calling your rule a cheat, and it is. It's a loophole by which a player can negate the fact that they've incurred a critical hit if they choose, ie ignore the impact of a major part of the game (critical hits). You can't cherry pick and pretend like that isn't part of the rule you're proposing just because you see OV-heavy mechs as "penalty enough"

2
ErrantOwl•

First, you keep saying that having OV is "already a penalty." It literally, literally isn't. Alpha Strike Mechs are assigned PV costs based on their AS stats, not based on anything from CBT. If the conversion process yields a Mech with lower S/M/L damage, then that Mech costs less than an otherwise identical Mech that comes through the conversion process with higher S/M/L damage. After conversion, these Mechs are what they are, and are priced accordingly.

Second, you deeply misunderstand the abstraction inherent in AS's scope. A weapon critical hit simply means that something has happened to your Mech that reduce its ability to include damage. The weapon critical result does not mean that your Mech has lost an arm, or that some heat sinks are deactivated, or... (etc.). That level of detail is for Classic, not AS. It's like complaining that Monopoly is "broken" because, when you mortgage a property, you can't shop around for the best interest rate, take out a partial mortgage for a lower rate, or choose between a variable or fixed rate mortgage, etc. Those are things that you can do in real life, or in other games with more simulationist detail, but they're simply out of place for Monopoly.The game deliberately doesn't work at that scope of abstraction. It's a higher level game.

If you bring your CBT assumptions to AS, you're probably going to be disappointed.

1
GoblinFiveRaven Alliance•

It is a byproduct of simplifying the rules and having all the weapons rolled into a damage value and maybe an OV value. You also cannot do indirect fire with just an LRM-5 iirc, or deal heat damage with just one flamer. And engine crits make you guns heat more.

But hey, you can just house rule it.

3
SCCOJake•

I'll have to double check, but I'm almost positive a single LRM5 will get you an IF0* special (see the SHD-2H), but flamers might require at least 2 to get the HT#/# special. Different weapons generate more or less heat damage though, so your mileage may vary on that one.

3
DINGVS_KHANPPC ENJOYER•

It's not a consistent thing. You'll see IF0* on cheap, poorly armed units that don't have the ability to deal damage because their negligible firepower gets rounded to 0 when converted to Alpha Strike. You see it for other weapons systems as well.

The BJ-1's AC2s technically get rounded down to 0 damage, but because that's kind of a big part of the Blackjack's design, they get long range 0* to differentiate them from other medium laser brawlers.

2
SCCOJake•

The math is actually very consistent, if a Mech's total damage, before rounding and after great adjustment is greater than 0, but less than 0.5 it gets the minimal damage value of 0*. The Blackjacks 2 AC/2s generate 0.4 damage, so it's gets the 0* damage. The IF# rule works the same way, the LRM5 has a 0.3 damage at long range, you total all IF# capable weapons long range damage, before rounding, and if it's above 0 but below 0.5 it gets the minimal IF0* ability.

If you can find me a Mech with one LRM5 and does not have the IF0* special I'll look into it, but I don't think you will.

5
DINGVS_KHANPPC ENJOYER•

Looks like you're right. MUL may have been updated since I last looked at it, but I could have sworn Vindicator, Shadow Hawk, and other LRM5 models didn't have IF specials at all.

I stand corrected.

6
SCCOJake•

Technically the BJ should have a minimal damage at extreme range too...

1
PerqqOP•

TBH given that there is simple solution to that simplification that retains balance (imo), I'm not sure what would be the reason not to do it that way.
It is just my finding after playing some games with OV-heavy (mainly lower-grade IS mechs) lances, and feeling like a single weapon hit basically cripples them out of the game.
Taking a single weapon hit when you are 2/2/1 with OV 2 means that you're losing half of your damage potential unless you keep on overheating every single turn, that then affects your movement and accuracy.
I don't think it is balanced and shift into not taking such mechs and therefore limiting decision-making

1
r3d1tAsh1t•

I think the damage value in the card says how much dmg the mech can deal at certain ranges without pushing the heatsinks too much, while OV is just shooting faster with the weapons instead of giving the heatsinks a chance to cool the mech down inbetween salvos.

3
Ardonis84:wolf:Clan Wolf Epsilon Galaxy•

I’m new to Alpha Strike to but I believe both can apply? If you’ve taken a weapon critical hit in a previous turn, you’re at -1 damage at all ranges to represent a number of your weapons being inoperable. If you choose to overheat, you add damage and go up the heat scale on a 1:1 basis up to your OV, but only at short and medium ranges without a special rule. I’m not seeing a problem with them stacking?

1
SCCOJake•

Base damage is already reduced for the OV ability, so you would be double reducing damage for a weapon hit critical dropping both base and OV damage. That's over kill.

3
Ardonis84:wolf:Clan Wolf Epsilon Galaxy•

By “stacking” what I meant is cancelling out: if you overheat for 2 but have taken a weapon critical, you get a -1 for the crit, +2 for the overheat, giving you a net +1 over your base value.

3
SCCOJake•

You can't use OV without the penalties. Yes they don't effect you the turn you use OV, but they do take effect (assuming the mech isn't destroyed that turn). Your total damage for that attack would still be, yes, 1 over base, but you have to take 2 heat for that 1 damage over your (original) base damage, instead of 2 damage over base for 2 heat. And you HAVE to take the 2 heat to get that level of damage. By reducing OV instead of base damage you won't have to take a much heat to get the same damage. And that's why it's applied to base not OV.

2
PerqqOP•

The problem is that damage shown in S/M/L brackets are not whole damage potential that mech can use - they are damage values that mech can use staying heat neutral.
Whole damage potential includes OV. Now, the problem is that if you take weapon hit and decrease the "base" (heat neutral values), you go into situation that mech doesn't have enough guns to fire (the damage is reduced), but somehow overheats from firing too many guns... it doesn't have.

I also find it overly punishing for mechs that rely on OV, that is already a punishment in itself.

2
TaciturnAndroid•

It doesn’t seem to be addressed in the rules anywhere.

The replies you’re getting are probably right, but this is the real issue. Unlike in Classic those explanations aren’t on the pages of AS:CE where they should be, and many aspects of routine gameplay seem at least at first like they directly contradict the internal logic of Classic, which is a rulebook problem rather than a rules problem.

1