Well, the fic already had some statement to the effect of "Earth doesn't need Mechs. First you say real life physics and engineering don't matter, then you say it matters whether a person has knowledge of these. Extremely consistent logic
Yes, thank you for illustrating my point that this fic has had a significant minority of awful posters who are in it just to make a revenge fic against Battletech or do endless techwanking. The point I have made a dozen times, and that very few non-awful people at this point disagree with. Do you even know what consistent logic is? Because you just failed at it. Read the statement again, and figure out how "he doesn't know shit about what he's talking about" contradicts with "he shouldn't be talking about how Battletech is unrealistic because it's irrelevant".
because one side of the equation is the rational (mostly) universe confined by those rules, including the evil proof: If A=B, and B=C then C=A... Logic, which clancyverse has, means that any non-retarded, moderately educated person will rather quicjly realize all the myriad world breaking uses for BT technology. Uber-wank weapons, infinite energy, planet crackers, etc... Allowing 'magic' to exist allows any non-genetically engineered by cameronsbrain damaged to exploit it for all they are worth. magic armor is immune to gamma rays = radiation shield for mechs that weighs 1/1000th the traditional shield. There are a million game breaking ways to exploit your stupid troll-magic MJ, so you add explanations, limitations, or outright throw the stupid shit out so you can make a homogenous world where absolutes created by rules artifacts and inconsistencies no longer result in head-scratching and confusion from all the rampant fridge logic and plotholes. Now i know from experience that you are the ultimate troll and will argue forever without adding any actual substance or even using real logic, and you will never compromise. You never have before, so i have no expectations you will now. However I once again find myself embroiled in your attempts to start an perpetuate yet another flame war over stupid shit. Its been done over and over. I'm done listening to your 'arguments', your positions, hell i'm done listening to anything you will ever say, as you never have anything of actual value beyond finding obscure and often wanky rules from your sourcebook of choice. Its always 'bitch bitch bitch, *insert accusation of masturbation* repeat ad nauseam' So back to the ignore list never again to come off. I guess I've made that mistake for the final time. So this is the final goodbye seeya never
Well, I guess you're forgetting FTL then? Logic, which Clancyverse has, means that they'd rapidly figure out that FTL means time travel, which means instant win. Except that's not how it works. And who's saying nobody wants limitations for Battletech equipment? Besides you, of course, because it's a huge strawman. What you want has always been 'interpretations' which conveniently always favor Clancyverse, rather than accepting that Battletech does things that are physically impossible by 21st century science and has been doing it since... 1980, where they said 'there are giant robots, armor works as hitpoints, and you have FTL travel'. Logic is fine. But you don't want logic, you want absolute stone cold Clancy supremacy by reducing everything to modern laws of physics just because, since you assume somehow that they always apply in a game designed for beer-and-pretzels wargaming by a bunch of non-physicists. We don't understand how Battletech technology works at all, TechManual to the contrary, that's just technobabble. We do know that it works in a consistent system in and of itself in the rules (the rules are consistent and logical-if they were not the wargame would not work, they just are not the same as the laws of physics). I'm perfectly willing to compromise as Magni, Kerrus, and others could point out, except what I see here is people like you who think 'compromise' is 'roll over for everything'. You want to debate how your side is right? Fine. Do so. Without the hysterics and slippery slope and without pussying off to the ignore list because you're a thin-skinned primadonna. Do that, and even if I disagree with you, I'll respect you. For not being a thin-skinned primadonna. But you don't want to do that. You don't care for discussing something in a discussion thread, you just want to hammer people with the loaded word of "REALISM" until they give into your wank. If you disagree, prove me wrong. I don't mind realism, I just think that keeping the integrity of a universe you're doing a crossover in is far more important than "realism". And as to your idea that non-retarded people will be able to figure everything out and make use of it 50000x better than Battletech? I have one response to you. Show me that what you are suggesting is in-universe possible rather than just SpaceBattles 'competence', and then I might care enough to listen to you. I give everyone a chance, you have just repeatedly wasted it by being a lackwit who insists that science fiction must follow science fact all the goddamn time whenever possible even when such following of science fact would fly all over the universe. The way Battletech armor works, even against hypervelocity impact, is consistent and has always been that way. So it resembles a magical energy shield more than any real armor material. So fucking what? You are not showing me at all how this is going to break the story, you just have what-ifs assuming that this property scales infinitely and you know all the limiting factors and potential uses of the technology with no context and a single instance. But you can run away and fail to address the argument, and I can tell you that violating debate rules in a discussion is violating debate rules in a discussion. If one of you likes JTibbs (perish the thought) enough, you can emptyquote this so he can try making an argument which isn't jumping right off the slippery slope and repeated red herrings. If not, he can just deal with his debate rules violation on his own.
*hands JTibbs a beer* Doesn't the sound of silence really relax you? Rather then listening to some asshole troll?
You explained the Flea presence and the rest are quite logical for a backwater, as long as the Orion is the mechwarrior property, wich I seems to remember it is. So nothing wrong.
You could add a handful of Po tanks or something if you want to flush out the local forces a bit. IIRC they are common as dirt, and its semi-acknowledged canon for the IS and periphery to have an 'invisible' reserve force of cheap expendable tanks.. Plus it also uses the AC/10 ammo. Though AC/10 ammo is kinda misleading because there is no guarantee the various AC/10s are even the same caliber... You could probably handwave it and say they get their AC/10's from the same source though to maintain parts commonality, something very important for a small poor planet like helm. This is all dependent on me not misunderstanding you, and this being basically the local militia/garrison and not forces from offworld.
Po wasn't available yet. It's not until post-4thSSW that the Po is developed. I think you probably meant the Scorpion, which is extremely similar to the Po. BTW, I think I've got something for how CSN (and very shortly after that, everyone else) tanks are so hard to kill. The CSN immediately goes to Hardened Armor. With all it's advantages AND ALL THE DISADVANTAGES that comes with it. 'Mechs, which by their very nature, need to be faster/more maneuverable, don't use it except in the rarest of cases. Although nerfing the CSN a bit via subtracting 1 MP from it's top speed (cruising speed stays the same) might work as well. No need for supertech, and it'd likely fit with the mentality of how Tanks today are made. This means that 'Mechs would be, inherently, better able to move through various terrain types due to being more flexible, allowing for rapid flanking and wars of maneuver, while tanks would be slower, but able to absorb damage more/better. As a side-along, this would pretty much force the CSN to have to invest in more 'Mechs as their pre-Contact tank designs, while being vastly faster, would be the proverbial 'eggs with sledgehammers'. Oh, and finally, had someone on the CBT forums mention as to WHY tanks have a hard time in CBT forests. And it's something we all missed. Earth's forests, outside of the western Amazon basin (and parts of India) have all been clear-cut at least 2 times within the last century, if not completely wiped out in places (70% of Europe's Roman-era forests are flat out GONE). So what we consider 'thick' forest is actually pretty damn light. Most CBT planets are damn near virgin except around the largest of cities. Everywhere else, it might as well be prehistoric forests, with trees (or their non-Earth equivalents) likely measuring a dozen feet across, and I don't just mean a rare Redwood expy, but that's the NORM. 'Light Forest' in CBT terms would be what most people today would consider HEAVY forest. Go find old tin-type photographs from the late 1880s-1900s of the western USA and the sheer diameter size of the logs that were commonly cut down in not just the hundreds, but the thousands. A day. That's what we'd be seeing on CBT worlds.
ah.. 3038. you're right... Scorpion would work as a dirt cheap alternative to the Po, though its an AC/5... That sucks for ammo commonality... Unless the AC/10's of the other vehicles mysteriously use the same ammo size, just fire twice as fast... pretty believable actually. There's a huge range of potential calibers you can use for both guns. that damned AC/5 sucks up so much tonnage on the tank though 8 tons of a 25 ton tank!
For those of you who still believe anything Barricade says while he's being such a big manly man hiding behind his Ignore list to avoid facing the fact that literally everyone who isn't a bad poster here has given up on him (and he's explicitly driven many of the authors out), I have only this to say. When Barricade is your supporter, it means that you are, de facto, probably opposed to most of the initial project supporters and writers. And definitely opposed to the spirit of the project, rather than 'random techwanking'. So... I think his support of JTibbs shows everyone why both of them (Barricade and JTibbs) should be removed from this forum by force, if need be. It might be too late to bring the authors back, and I disagree with them plenty, but still. I think they'd agree with me that this story would be better dead than having those two defile its corpse.
Yes, yes, quoting flowery language about 'two deep holes' (which could just be craters that don't get to IS) tells you that hypervelocity impact can destroy only part of an armor layer just fine, despite literally everything in Battletech (including Coleman's novels, because I own several of them) acting entirely differently, with armor falling down in ton-lots from hits like that. And "gouges" doesn't mean 'penetrations', it means "gouges". You know, like what happens when you lose a ton of armor around the track of a projectile from a glancing hit? Of course, I find it awfully suspicious that you never mentioned what mech was taking the hits. Because it might just be a very light Omni with less than 15pts of armor on those locations. They exist, you know. And you still haven't addressed the fact that any penetrations you see before armor are gone, even if this is true, are cosmetic or extremely lucky. And you still haven't addressed why having a super assault gun is a good idea when it flies right in the face of every paradigm in Battletech.
AC/5s aren't actually all that bad. If you're looking for the optimum point of range over damage, go for the AC/5s. If you're looking for the optimum point of damage over range, go for the AC/10s. AC/2s have range, but the damage is pitiful (unless you use Pikes), while AC/20s have 'LOLIWIN' firepower, but pitiful range. Also AC/5s can get insanely nasty if using a combination of the various alternate round types (AP, Precision, and Flechette work best imho). Also, don't forget you can buy three and a quarter Scorpions (327k C-bills) for every one Po (1.06M C-bills). So that's potentially 50% more firepower available to your armor corps for the same price-tag. And I think there's a bit more armor spread around as well. So it's kind of a 3 Shermans VS 1 King Tiger, type thing all over again. Which is rather funny to imagine.
Jon Berry, looks good to me. I'd say wait for some of the experts to chime but since most of are either staying away because of or are participating in MJ12 Commando's latest flamethrower duel in a phone booth with somebody daring to have CEarth innovate...
In the second case, LBX round are described getting into an ankle joint through the hole. Besides, it doesn't matter if they are craters - what matters is that armor can be destroyed in one spot without the surrounding parts being destroyed. Any attempt to claim that in a particular case a penetration is incomplete is simple goalpost shifting. Statements about tearing gashes or punching through armor (albeit usually thin layers like the rear) don't seem uncommon. What's the difference? It's still localized damage. An Orion and a Shadow Cat. A cosmetic penetration can't be deep. A lucky one can't be plural.
For the Helm garrison you can add Scorpions, Galleons and perhaps some missile carriers, I´m not so sure about Hetzers or any other vehicles.
The primary problem is that the so called innovation is counter to the setting. Here is an example of a proper Beast Slayer: Code: Type/Model: Beastslayer (Gauss) SH Mass: 200 tons Equipment: Items Mass Int. Struct.: 120 pts Standard 0 40,00 Engine: 200 Fusion 0 8,50 Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 4,50 Cruise MP: 1 Flank MP: 2 Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 ,00 Cockpit & Controls: 0 10,00 Crew: 14 Members 0 ,00 Armor Factor: 112 pts Standard 0 7,00 Internal Armor Structure Value Front: 20 20 Front L / R Sides: 20 18/18 Rear L / R Sides: 20 18/18 Rear: 20 20 Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass -------------------------------------------------------- 1 Veh. Mass Driver * Front 0 10 2 130,00 -------------------------------------------------------- TOTALS: 0 2 200,00 Items & Tons Left: 43 ,00 Calculated Factors: Total Cost: 33.134.444 C-Bills The used technologies have a basis in the setting and are of the size that we can expect large amounts of damage. And we can also see why it wasn't used by the SL, as it won't fit in normal transport bays and is highly fragile and extremely specialized. Edit: Using projectiles of 1 ton per shot.
Yes, yes. And if it was the first time the Beast Slayer inspired such fiery discussion I'd even care to go in detail why I think the design is fine. In short: 1. It is designed to threathen Assault Mechs. Threathen them with 1 hit kills. This it does. 1.1. If the stars align right and/or the vehicle commander doesn't like to have a functional gun afterwards it can go after dropships. (Both of these btw. will elevate it from 'just a vehicle, get the mechs' to 'ignore the non-Assault mechs and kill those things'. 2. Being somewhat rigidly mounted and unable to be turreted it is extremly dependent on being positioned right to it's job. 2.1 Being heavy and big it can't allow itself to be flanked because it is unlikely to be able to unflank itself. (That means it is highly dependend on proper intel and reliable screening to it's job) 3. It will be terrifying when it first appears but turn out to be very vulnerable to infiltration tactics and the good old 'be elsewhere' approach. 3.1. And it will be a priority target because it threathens two holy cows of a BT commander: his Assault(or heavy) Mechs and his dropships. And unlike a Devastator it is actually very vulnerable to Light's or PBI and thus can be hunted down with relativly low risk. 3.2 And it's totally defenseless against air attacks. I mean it could shoot a (stupid) Light but air ? A very stupid chopper. At best. Also: A) I don't recall a rule that everything here has to be balanced. Sure some balance is necessary and to that end a Jagermech with unnerfed CEarh targeting would belong into the bad ideas bin. But this ? It has some glaring weaknesses (It is huge, limited targetting, will require escort later on) and quite frankly Steiner already has an IS counterpart with it's Rommel pattern assault gun. It's going fuck some poor SOB's operation up big time (Samsonow, probably.) but beyond that ? Well it might get C* to research this stuff sooner so there might be a Celestial Assault Mech with a pair of C* equivalents of it down the line.) It's going to give a few "'Merica fuck yeah(Actually Russia but eh)" moments and afterwards fade into the background. It's dropship scaled cousin on the other hand.... B) It fits the theme of familar but different. IS/Clan/CEarth AC/Ultra AC/Non suck Rifle LRN/CLRM/The CEarth flavor Laser/ER Laser/ER ER Laser but only IS damage Naval Laser/Naval Laser/Brigthstar Gauss/C Gauss/Railgun Only for PPC's CEarth hasn't had a unique take so far. All the other are distinctly different but not totally new to BT and come with their own issues, some of whom might see them retired a few decades down the road in favor of a traditional BT analog. Vehicle and Mech mounted railguns for example might turn to be simply inferior to same tonnage gauss gun once CEarth fully embraces the Ragnarok bug. CEarth missiles are going to face very harsh evolutionary pressures by AMS.
Yes but J-Edgars use a fussion engine wich made them unlikely to be found in Helm, remember that the planet is a backwater. And before you suggest them the Sarracen, Scimitar and Saladins have good reputations thus the backwater argument holds them out too.
There is a variant of the J-Edgar (god so many puns...) that reduces the armor by a ton to include an ICE engine and some fuel, but I still haven't committed to anything along those lines yet.
Yep. All in all, it's still not TOO bad a design, given it's freakin rediculous speed. Edit: You try targeting it in a battletech campaign It took me GUNNERY 5 by ATOW's standards (Base gunnery 3 in Battletech TT terms) before I was able to hit the damn thing once....
Hrm, with just a garrison Lance of 'Mechs, how many vehicles should I plan for? And I figure that there will be militia as the major component of the infantry fighting force, so I've got that covered.
maybe 3 times the number of mechs as tanks? with plenty of unarmed/machine gun armed support vehicles
8 vehicles, you should be able to fill the missing numbers with Pikes, LRM/SRM Carriers and Maxims/APCs.
