Karagin
01/21/07 06:46 PM
70.123.166.36
|
Okay here is one I am working one it's based on the German WW2 assault gun vehicles, ie the ones without a turret, and is mainly meant to be used as defenisive fighting vehicle.
Code:
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Tokugawa TGA-103
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3060
Config: Wheeled Vehicle
Rules: Level 2, Standard design
Mass: 80 tons
Power Plant: 220 Foundation Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: AmberStar Weave Standard
Armament:
1 Series 400 Godkiller Heavy Gauss Rifle
1 Krik'shh Class 16 ER PPC
4 Tolgren Arms Machine Guns
Manufacturer: Kolwezara Armor Works
Location: Starbuck
Communications System: Datacom 26
Targeting & Tracking System: Hartford S1000
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Tokugawa TGA-103
Mass: 80 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 32 pts Standard 0 8.00
Engine: 220 Fusion 0 10.00
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 5.00
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 15 Single 0 5.00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 4.00
Crew: 6 Members 0 .00
Armor Factor: 240 pts Standard 0 15.00
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 8 80
Left / Right Sides: 8 53/53
Rear: 8 54
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Heavy Gauss Rifle Front 0 16 2 22.00
1 ER PPC Front 15 1 7.00
1 Machine Gun Front 0 100 2 1.00
1 Machine Gun Left 0 100 1 1.00
1 Machine Gun Right 0 100 1 1.00
1 Machine Gun Rear 0 100 1 1.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 15 8 80.00
Items & Tons Left: 13 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 3,297,467 C-Bills
Battle Value: 982
Cost per BV: 3,357.91
Weapon Value: 968 / 968 (Ratio = .99 / .99)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 29; MRDmg = 20; LRDmg = 8
BattleForce2: MP: 3W, Armor/Structure: 0 / 9
Damage PB/M/L: 3/3/2, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 10
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
08/26/09 12:05 AM
72.178.75.99
|
Would have hoped for more on this one...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
06/27/13 05:45 PM
72.178.85.122
|
So do you guys think this would be better suited to how things have turned out in the Inner Sphere now or pre-Jihad time line?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
06/27/13 09:10 PM
208.54.32.145
|
It would be OK for any era.
Everyone knows I don't like heavy or assault tanks so its not a surprise to anyone that I would say that I would ditch the heavy Gauss rifle and drop the tanks tonnage by 40 tons.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
Karagin
06/27/13 09:51 PM
72.178.85.122
|
No it would not.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
06/28/13 07:10 AM
208.54.32.145
|
OK let me be more spastic it would be OK for any era that the equipment is available for. Is that better? It is a OK support fire tank. I would change that to a good support fire tank if it had more HGR ammo.
You might want to ditch most of that machine gun ammo. If the tank gets swamped with infinity I doubt that the tank will survive long enough to use up all of that ammo. I would use fractional accounting and drop 1.5 tons of MG ammo and move that weight to ammo for the HGR. Fifty rounds of MG ammo even with four MGs drawing from it that will last a long time. If you dont want to use fractional accounting I would move one ton of MG ammo weight to for HGR ammo.
Another idea is to drop one MG and drop 1.5 tons of MG ammo and add two tons of HGR ammo.
sixteen rounds of HGR ammo will not last long at all
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
Karagin
06/28/13 10:00 AM
72.178.85.122
|
I will tweak it based on the ammo points. You do bring up a good point.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
06/28/13 10:24 AM
208.54.32.145
|
I would love to know what German WW2 Tank that inspired you to design the Tokugawa. By WW2 everyone had learned that you only put one main gun onto a main battle tank. It was in The War to End All Wars where multiple main guns where put onto tanks. The exception in WW2 was AA guns where you wanted to put as much lead into the air as you possibly could and penetration was not as much as a concern since aircraft are hard to armor heavily even by today's standards. The more guns you mount the smaller the guns have to be. The idea was to put in the biggest gun that you can possibly mount and that meant only one gun.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
Karagin
06/28/13 06:40 PM
72.178.85.122
|
Most tanks of WW2 had two to three MGs plus the main gun. One Coaxil, one for the tank commander and one for the driver/loader.
The German Assault guns series of tanks, which they had many of, since they never turned down using captured vehicles like tracked vehicles as assault guns. Also this is BT so having the ones on the sides means they can handle infantry and such which would be found in cities and close quarters areas like woods and such.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|