Karagin
11/16/09 11:21 PM
72.178.75.99
|
Below are two designs on the same chassis, each has ranged weapons to give it the punch and both are considered to be sluggers or medium to long range harassers.
Code:
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Gandira G-1
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3132
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 2, Custom design
Mass: 100 tons
Power Plant: 300 Vlar XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Ferro-Fibrous
Armament:
3 ER Large Lasers
2 Machine Guns
1 LRM 10 w/ Artemis IV
1 C³ Slave Unit
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Gandira G-1
Mass: 100 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 50 pts Standard 0 10.00
Engine: 300 XL Fusion 2 9.50
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 5.00
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 36 Single 0 26.00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 5.00
Crew: 7 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 2.50
Armor Factor: 296 pts Ferro-Fibrous 2 16.50
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 10 60
Left / Right Sides: 10 60/60
Rear: 10 56
Turret: 10 60
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
3 ER Large Lasers Turret 36 3 15.00
2 Machine Guns Turret 0 100 3 1.50
1 LRM 10 w/ Artemis IV Turret 0 24 2 8.00
1 C³ Slave Unit Turret 0 1 1.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 36 13 100.00
Items & Tons Left: 12 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 19,450,000 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 1,560 (old BV = 938)
Cost per BV: 12,467.95
Weapon Value: 1,810 / 1,762 (Ratio = 1.16 / 1.13)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 27; MRDmg = 23; LRDmg = 10
BattleForce2: MP: 3T, Armor/Structure: 0 / 12
Damage PB/M/L: 3/3/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 16
Specials: c3s
Code:
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
* CUSTOM WEAPON
Type/Model: Gandira G-2
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3132
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 2, Custom design
Mass: 100 tons
Power Plant: 300 Vlar XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Ferro-Fibrous
Armament:
1 LRM 10 w/ Artemis IV
1 C³ Slave Unit
6 Light PPC (TM)s*
6 Machine Guns
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Gandira G-2
Mass: 100 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 50 pts Standard 0 10.00
Engine: 300 XL Fusion 2 9.50
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 5.00
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 30 Single 0 20.00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 5.00
Crew: 7 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 3.00
Armor Factor: 296 pts Ferro-Fibrous 2 16.50
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 10 60
Left / Right Sides: 10 60/60
Rear: 10 56
Turret: 10 60
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 LRM 10 w/ Artemis IV Turret 0 24 2 8.00
1 C³ Slave Unit Turret 0 1 1.00
6 Light PPC (TM)s* Turret 30 6 18.00
3 Machine Guns Turret 0 100 4 2.00
3 Machine Guns Front 0 100 3 2.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 30 20 100.00
Items & Tons Left: 5 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 20,672,000 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 1,619 (old BV = 997)
Cost per BV: 12,768.38
Weapon Value: 1,998 / 1,950 (Ratio = 1.23 / 1.20)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 32; MRDmg = 25; LRDmg = 10
BattleForce2: MP: 3T, Armor/Structure: 0 / 12
Damage PB/M/L: 4/4/4, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 16
Specials: c3s
Given that they are using the C3 Slave units, I would say these are found in Kurita or Davion forces or ComStar. The G-2 has a nice battery of weapons.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Prince_of_Darkness
11/17/09 10:33 AM
205.202.120.216
|
Energy weapons? On MY Tanks? More likely than I thought.
Both devote far too much to their energy guns. The G-1 puts out an underwhelming level of firepower for it's cost; at 20 million C-Bills, I could probably get an assault 'mech at half (or more) of the cost that can mount the same guns (but with more efficiency, due to DHS). Because of this, I would carry (at most) one ER Large Laser for your energy gun (but you could go with pulse, like two mediums and a small, so you won't need those MG's) an some heavy ballistic backup- I was thinking a Gauss rifle and LB-10X, which I'm pretty sure you can mount.
The G-2 also suffers from this, but loses a little range and total damage. While it now has the ability to "pepper" an opponent, it has no concentrated fire, which is bad for a tank of this size and cost. I would remove all the Light PPC's for a single heavy and a Gauss Rifle, and probably use the rest of the tonnage for some missile system to exploit the holes opened.
EDIT:
The G-2, if you remove the LPPC's and heat sinks, can mount a full HPPC and Gauss Rifle with three tons of ammo and still have 5 tons left over without changes to the turret. I would go with an SRM 6 and a ton of ammo, and then give the Machine guns the array additions.
Edited by Prince_of_Darkness (11/17/09 10:35 AM)
|
Karagin
11/17/09 11:51 PM
72.178.75.99
|
No kidding, they both pay the price of noting having double heat sinks avaiable for vehicles, thus no matter what you end up paying more to use energy weapons beyond one that give up to only 10 heat.
As for you suggested change, I don't see any advantages of the using the HPPC and Gauss over what is there already.
Also you seem to confuse the use of the tech as a change in how the unit would or could be used tactically. Peppering can cause more damage to an opponent then just the weathering effect. Take the idea that your enemy just had his mech hit with 5 Light PPCs and the LRM, now while overall not doing a lot of damage they have to watch their armor go down all over the mech, this goes on for a couple of turns, quickly the mech player has to readjust his tactical thinking, thus his changes means you have other opportunities to take advantage of and could win the fight for you.
I can see that for some the idea that tank must have a main gun with a back up as standard thinking, and I have designed many of tanks that way and enjoy using them, but also at the same time the idea of a weapons platform, which is what a tank is, is that it can give flexibility to the fight and thus not tied to one single way of fighting.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Prince_of_Darkness
11/18/09 05:14 PM
205.202.120.216
|
Quote:
As for you suggested change, I don't see any advantages of the using the HPPC and Gauss over what is there already.
Actual penetrating damage? More efficiency? More range?
Quote:
Also you seem to confuse the use of the tech as a change in how the unit would or could be used tactically. Peppering can cause more damage to an opponent then just the weathering effect. Take the idea that your enemy just had his mech hit with 5 Light PPCs and the LRM, now while overall not doing a lot of damage they have to watch their armor go down all over the mech, this goes on for a couple of turns, quickly the mech player has to readjust his tactical thinking, thus his changes means you have other opportunities to take advantage of and could win the fight for you.
It would have been nice to have something that told me that they were meant for armor-weathering, but even then I have something much better than a horde of Light PPC's- LB-10x autocannons. You can keep two of the LPPC's and remove the rest for LB-10's, and end up with a great anti-air platform that is capable of the same "shredding" attacks with more efficiency and damage.
Quote:
I can see that for some the idea that tank must have a main gun with a back up as standard thinking, and I have designed many of tanks that way and enjoy using them, but also at the same time the idea of a weapons platform, which is what a tank is, is that it can give flexibility to the fight and thus not tied to one single way of fighting.
That statement goes against these two tanks. Both of them are under-damage and lack central focus- I only knew the second was for armor shredding until you posted so, and the first (to me) seems like it's trying to emulate the Shrek PPC carrier, but to little avail (with the huge cost and all). Saying that something doesn't need penetrating power, especially when it is so much more fragile compared to the other units (tanks to mechs) means that it has to be for a special purpose- the opposite of what you just said.
|
Karagin
11/18/09 06:58 PM
72.178.75.99
|
Give the two an actually try in a battle, then tell me how they do.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
|
|
Extra information
|
0 registered and 164 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie
Print Topic
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Topic views: 4722
|
|
|
|
|
|
|