ATN082268
05/30/13 10:49 PM
69.129.18.69
|
Going for cheap, easy to maintain but still a threat 
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Tomahawk
Tech: Inner Sphere / 2750
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 1, Custom design
Mass: 90 tons
Power Plant: 270 I.C.E.
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
1 LRM 20
1 SRM 6
4 Machine Guns
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Tomahawk
Mass: 90 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 45 pts Standard 0 9.00
Engine: 270 I.C.E. 0 29.00
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 0 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 4.50
Crew: 6 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.50
Armor Factor: 392 pts Standard 0 24.50
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 9 102
Left / Right Sides: 9 75/75
Rear: 9 70
Turret: 9 70
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 30 2 15.00
1 SRM 6 Turret 0 15 2 4.00
1 Machine Gun Front 0 1 .50
1 Machine Gun Left 0 1 .50
1 Machine Gun Right 0 1 .50
1 Machine Gun Rear 0 100 2 1.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 0 9 90.00
Items & Tons Left: 14 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 2,508,000 C-Bills
Battle Value: 780
Cost per BV: 3,215.38
Weapon Value: 850 / 850 (Ratio = 1.09 / 1.09)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 16; MRDmg = 10; LRDmg = 5
BattleForce2: MP: 3, Armor/Structure: 0 / 15
Damage PB/M/L: 2/2/1, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 8
Specials: if
|
Karagin
05/31/13 12:16 AM
50.36.82.183
|
Okay it is 2 million c-bills...it has ONE long range weapon that averages 12 points of damage on a good set of odds, then it has the minimum of the LRM....okay that is kind of covered by the SRM6, but now here it the issue, you give it only these two main line weapons. So when the return fire slams the vehicle, take a good look at the hit location tables for vehicles, you will see that the turret will be gone as fast as side hits will cripple the vehicle. And really do you need almost a 25 tons of armor on this thing? You could get more weapons with better knock out power or at the least better average damage by reducing the armor.
So based off what we have seen of your designs you seem to like to sit at range and try and blast the other side to bits. Beyond that your stuff has not depth or even real use outside of limited engagements or sieges and the idea of latter don't happen that often in BT and the former are only great in the novels where the author picks the winner from the start.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ATN082268
05/31/13 10:24 AM
69.129.18.69
|
Quote:
Okay it is 2 million c-bills...it has ONE long range weapon that averages 12 points of damage on a good set of odds, then it has the minimum of the LRM....okay that is kind of covered by the SRM6, but now here it the issue, you give it only these two main line weapons. So when the return fire slams the vehicle, take a good look at the hit location tables for vehicles, you will see that the turret will be gone as fast as side hits will cripple the vehicle. And really do you need almost a 25 tons of armor on this thing? You could get more weapons with better knock out power or at the least better average damage by reducing the armor.
So based off what we have seen of your designs you seem to like to sit at range and try and blast the other side to bits. Beyond that your stuff has not depth or even real use outside of limited engagements or sieges and the idea of latter don't happen that often in BT and the former are only great in the novels where the author picks the winner from the start.
I think the design does a pretty good job given its critieria of being cheap and easy to maintain. Although I could have added more guns, I went for endurance and added more ammunition and armor. Those one or two extra guns *might* spell the difference between victory or defeat but the same could be said for more ammunition and armor. Especially since you can come up with a scenario to defeat any design, I'm not going to spend time debating hypothical scenarios. And it seems you are unaware that the main turret of a vehicle only gets hit on rolls from 10-12 with the possibility of a critical on a 12. If you don't like certain designs or even just my designs, fine but leave out the bias as it is painfully clear in your analysis of those designs.
|
Reiter
05/31/13 01:10 PM
142.11.67.185
|
Hmm, I do like this one a little bit. Needs a slight change though
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Heavy Support ATN-0882
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3060
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 1, Standard design
Mass: 90 tons
Power Plant: 270 I.C.E.
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
2 LRM 15s
2 SRM 4s
5 Machine Guns
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Heavy Support ATN-0882
Mass: 90 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 45 pts Standard 0 9.00
Engine: 270 I.C.E. 0 29.00
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 0 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 4.50
Crew: 6 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 2.00
Armor Factor: 296 pts Standard 0 18.50
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 9 72
Left / Right Sides: 9 54/54
Rear: 9 44
Turret: 9 72
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
2 LRM 15s Turret 0 32 3 18.00
2 SRM 4s Turret 0 50 3 6.00
2 Machine Guns Front 0 100 3 1.50
1 Machine Gun Left 0 1 .50
1 Machine Gun Right 0 1 .50
1 Machine Gun Right 0 1 .50
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 0 12 90.00
Items & Tons Left: 11 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 2,668,550 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 1,371 (old BV = 759)
Cost per BV: 1,946.43
Weapon Value: 1,054 / 1,054 (Ratio = .77 / .77)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 22; MRDmg = 15; LRDmg = 8
BattleForce2: MP: 3T, Armor/Structure: 0 / 11
Damage PB/M/L: 3/3/2, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 14
Specials: if
Throw in some fluff about being an active support tank assisting in breaking enemy lines, with a little bit of defense and it would hold up in the BT universe. Only six less tons of armor with a better spread for the turret. Could be the Mackie of tanks.
And realized why I kept seeing empty tonnage left, HM likes to not line up text well with the forum. Those empty crit spaces with .00 tonnage left have a space in between...looks like 0 .00 and the human mind automatically removes the space. To error is human 
|
Karagin
05/31/13 09:41 PM
50.36.82.183
|
Armor IS NOT GOING TO SAVE IT, look at the crit tables for vehicles again, if you think its' not going to leave this thing sitting there as a target with all of its' armor you may want to check it again. And what bias? You are the one that post armor heavy vehicles that are more suited to Renegade Legion or Ogre games then Battletech, vehicles die faster then mechs. So show me the bias you are claiming, if is it being critical of your designs then I guess you need to live with it or not, that is your choice. My stuff gets beat to hell on the board and revamped and while I may not like it, I can always use the ideas as variants or not my choice. So how about you stop with the idea of My Crap Don't Stink and learn to live with folks adding to or taking away from. And oh, noting that some hits leaves main weapon out would be the LRM20 and poof there goes your main weapon or track destroyed and that is on a side hit rolling a four or less...yeah don't see this thing doing much. But hey if it works for your games...oh and landmines and VTOLs will end it just as fast will other vehicles used by players who can read terrain and know how to use their units as a team.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
05/31/13 09:42 PM
50.36.82.183
|
It's not HM text it's how code works on this board. Seen it on other boards as well, the text doesn't always line up.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Maurer
06/01/13 05:43 PM
142.11.67.185
|
Code:
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Ornager Hover Support Tank ORN-M1
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3025
Config: Hovercraft
Rules: Level 2, Standard design
Mass: 35 tons
Power Plant: 105 I.C.E.
Cruise Speed: 86.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 129.6 km/h
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
1 LRM 20
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Ornager Hover Support Tank ORN-M1
Mass: 35 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 20 pts Standard 0 3.50
Engine: 105 I.C.E. 0 7.00
Cruise MP: 8
Flank MP: 12
Heat Sinks: 0 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 2.00
Crew: 3 Members 0 .00
Lift Equipment: 0 3.50
Turret Equipment: 0 1.00
Armor Factor: 64 pts Standard 0 4.00
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 4 16
Left / Right Sides: 4 12/12
Rear: 4 10
Turret: 4 14
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 24 2 14.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 0 2 35.00
Items & Tons Left: 10 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 1,022,125 C-Bills
Battle Value: 578
Cost per BV: 1,768.38
Weapon Value: 181 / 181 (Ratio = .31 / .31)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 7; MRDmg = 9; LRDmg = 5
BattleForce2: MP: 8H, Armor/Structure: 0 / 3
Damage PB/M/L: 1/1/1, Overheat: 0
Class: GL; Point Value: 6
Specials: if
This is something I whipped out, but never got around to fluffing (fast, cheap, LRM support with a bit of ammo endurance). While it lacks the MGs, armor, and SRM, it is faster and half the cost. You could field 2 of these for one of ANT'ies tanks wiht enough C-Bills left over to buy spare parts for the lack of armor.
Easy variants would be down grading the -20 to a -15 and either adding 3 tons of armor; an SRM-4 with one ton of ammo, or an SRM-6 with one ton of ammo (reduce LRM ammo).
"Captain! We're completely surrounded on all sides." - Kiff, Futurama
..."Excellent, then we may attack in any direction." - Zapp Brannigan, Futurama
"A fool fights a war on two fronts; only an idiot defends on one." - Fusilier
|
ATN082268
06/02/13 05:45 PM
69.129.18.69
|
Quote:
Code:
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Ornager Hover Support Tank ORN-M1
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3025
Config: Hovercraft
Rules: Level 2, Standard design
Mass: 35 tons
Power Plant: 105 I.C.E.
Cruise Speed: 86.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 129.6 km/h
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
1 LRM 20
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Ornager Hover Support Tank ORN-M1
Mass: 35 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 20 pts Standard 0 3.50
Engine: 105 I.C.E. 0 7.00
Cruise MP: 8
Flank MP: 12
Heat Sinks: 0 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 2.00
Crew: 3 Members 0 .00
Lift Equipment: 0 3.50
Turret Equipment: 0 1.00
Armor Factor: 64 pts Standard 0 4.00
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 4 16
Left / Right Sides: 4 12/12
Rear: 4 10
Turret: 4 14
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 24 2 14.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 0 2 35.00
Items & Tons Left: 10 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 1,022,125 C-Bills
Battle Value: 578
Cost per BV: 1,768.38
Weapon Value: 181 / 181 (Ratio = .31 / .31)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 7; MRDmg = 9; LRDmg = 5
BattleForce2: MP: 8H, Armor/Structure: 0 / 3
Damage PB/M/L: 1/1/1, Overheat: 0
Class: GL; Point Value: 6
Specials: if
This is something I whipped out, but never got around to fluffing (fast, cheap, LRM support with a bit of ammo endurance). While it lacks the MGs, armor, and SRM, it is faster and half the cost. You could field 2 of these for one of ANT'ies tanks wiht enough C-Bills left over to buy spare parts for the lack of armor.
Easy variants would be down grading the -20 to a -15 and either adding 3 tons of armor; an SRM-4 with one ton of ammo, or an SRM-6 with one ton of ammo (reduce LRM ammo).
As I have said in other posts, cost for military designs really isn't an issue most of the time for Clans or major houses; given the size of Battletech militaries compared to population, that doesn't surprise me either. And since you can come up with a cheaper and/or smaller size unit(s) for any other unit, your hovercraft alternative really isn't that useful.
|
Reiter
06/02/13 09:10 PM
142.11.67.185
|
Quote:
As I have said in other posts, cost for military designs really isn't an issue most of the time for Clans or major houses; given the size of Battletech militaries compared to population, that doesn't surprise me either. And since you can come up with a cheaper and/or smaller size unit(s) for any other unit, your hovercraft alternative really isn't that useful.
As said in other posts, you probably missed the entire point. There are three types of vehicles in canon, 1) Cannon machines 2) Personal Machines created by players 3) OP Useless armor bricks with under power weapons or OP Weapon packed machines. The last 2 are blurred together, but the thing for all three is that there is a cost associated with them...to limit machines such as yours. Otherwise, you have boring slug fests lasting hours with little happening or short one shot killing machines. Why are there even costs like BV and c-bills associated in the first place? Why would anyone go for a table top game in the first place, if they know they cannot kill you or just one shot them...it would be boring as hell don't you think?
So, your entire concept of "Clans and Houses have unlimited budget" is moot, clans themselves had a bidding process to keep the cost of war down. Otherwise you actually have 2 outcomes...Clans roll over the Inner Sphere and Inner Sphere keeps the Clans in a stalemate. Please explain, how can one roll over the other with unlimited firepower while the other just holds them back given unlimited budget to do so. End result... its Clan = Inner Sphere, no one wins, no one would be interested in the Battletech universe. There is a limit for balance reasons. Now in your case, your machines are usually just crap...max weight, massive amounts of armor, very little weapons in limited arcs or the best tech possible...they are bland and unimaginative because your concept seems to be "How to win, at any cost". You want to go at it, fine...in every engagement I just drop a couple of Alamo missiles, I win! End result, unlimited budget, no holds bar reason to not nuke you from orbit. Screw things like cost, weight limit, or balance factors. That's imaginative.
|
ATN082268
06/02/13 10:31 PM
69.129.18.69
|
<Snip Post>
<As said in other posts, you probably missed the entire point. There are three types of vehicles in canon, 1) Cannon machines 2) Personal Machines created by players 3) OP Useless armor bricks with under power weapons or OP Weapon packed machines. The last 2 are blurred together, but the thing for all three is that there is a cost associated with them...to limit machines such as yours. Otherwise, you have boring slug fests lasting hours with little happening or short one shot killing machines.>
First, all officially published designs are canon designs and I'm sure some of them (or perhaps most of them) are similar to those designed by players other than the game line developers. Second, C-Bill cost isn't really a good indicator of combat effectiveness. Battle Value (BV) is probably the best overall system for balancing forces. What has largely been pointed out on the boards is unit X costs Y amount of C-Bills.
There are a number of costly canon designs, so C-Bills certainly isn't the sole factor to whether a design gets built or not in the Battletech Universe. If you want to point out that a design doesn't have a good BV/ C-Bill ratio, fine but that doesn't automatically mean it would not have been produced unless, perhaps, you can show that all canon designs have a good BV/ C-Bill ratio. Good luck with that one
<So, your entire concept of "Clans and Houses have unlimited budget" is moot, clans themselves had a bidding process to keep the cost of war down.>
I'd argue that Clan bidding is more to hone individual skill than conservation of resources. Low bids can, in fact, drive up the cost of war with extra damage from the enemy even if you do manage to win. If you have extra forces on hand that aren't being used elsewhere, then using less forces than are available makes little sense from a conservation standpoint as you can defeat an enemy easier with more forces.
In closing, I find it interesting how many people deride those who like to use/design larger units but how few people deride those who like to use/design smaller units. Kind of revealing
Edited by ATN082268 (06/03/13 12:22 AM)
|
Karagin
06/03/13 11:04 AM
50.36.82.183
|
You really missed the point ATN. The canon vehicles are designed to be NOT perfect, they have flaws and they are the best that can be built, for many reasons. Also BV is flawed. I can pick a better match up using tonage based system and still have a balanced game. So no going off of BV is not going to show you anything.
Yes things cost a lot, hence one reason the large vehicles are rare birds and even then tend to be used sparingly and we don't see hardly any 200 ton tanks in the BT universe for the simple reason and one that you seem to miss is that they would die fast, quick and in a hurry, no one is going to let them get in to the fight and the in game setting any of the military leadership knows full well that their ability to destroy these things means they hurt the enemy far more in cost of money and resources so they will kill these things. Which makes them a no fun to use and if you happen to get players willing to go against them I am sure you will find that they will use every munckin item out there to take it out as well as tactics and smarter think.
Which brings me to a good point, have you actually used your 200 ton monsters in a fight before? Be honest with us on this, and share how they did if you have indeed used them.
And you last point, no one is saying not to use larger units, I would gladly use a 90 ton tank built correctly or a support tank like an LRM carrier or artillery one over a 200 ton monster any day. Just as I would use two 45 ton vehicles over a 90 tonner if they offer me more options. Maybe if you stop thinking or feeling that we are attacking you personnally then maybe you would see we are not, that we are pointing out options with the vehicles and such that could help you build better tanks etc...it is up to you to take the ideas or advice. And if you look at anyone's posting on here, you see that folks have offered ideas or reworks of the things posted, some are good ideas, so are not, but they are trying to help. And for myself if I like the reworked or offered idea, I add it to the fluff in the variants section since it would make sense that the crews or users would modify things.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Reiter
06/03/13 12:14 PM
142.11.67.185
|
Quote:
In closing, I find it interesting how many people deride those who like to use/design larger units but how few people deride those who like to use/design smaller units. Kind of revealing
I have no problem with max weight vehicles. Its just that you
1) Always go max weight
2) Boast how awesome it is and cost isn't a factor
Google Maus tank, click the image tab and look at any real life photos. Its a massive behemoth the Germans where building in WWII, but do you think a single nation regardless of budget could build an army of those thing? That thing is the equivalent of your huge tanks, but guess what...any number of Sherman's could easily defeat it. Problem is, it was going to cost a lot of lives for the Sherman tank crews but if you take out one track on the Maus...its good as useless since it only has X amount of shells and Z (zero) amount comfort for the crew regardless of how thick its frontal armor was (like 8 inches I believe). Its an example of why cheaper tanks are better, but a heavy tank makes an awesome break through tank supported by lighter units (example, the Tiger and Panther tanks supported by the Panzer III and Panzer IV). If your tank was something like this...
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Untitled
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3060
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Standard design
Mass: 200 tons
Power Plant: 200 I.C.E.
Cruise Speed: 10.8 km/h
Maximum Speed: 21.6 km/h
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
3 Autocannon/20s
2 LRM 20s
2 SRM 6s
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Untitled
Mass: 200 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 140 pts Standard 0 40.00
Engine: 200 I.C.E. 0 17.00
Cruise MP: 1
Flank MP: 2
Heat Sinks: 0 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 10.00
Crew: 14 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 7.00
Armor Factor: 640 pts Standard 0 40.00
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 20 129
Front L / R Sides: 20 85/85
Rear L / R Sides: 20 85/85
Rear: 20 64
Turret: 20 107
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
3 Autocannon/20s Turret 0 60 4 54.00
2 LRM 20s Turret 0 24 3 24.00
2 SRM 6s Turret 0 30 3 8.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 0 10 200.00
Items & Tons Left: 35 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 11,937,444 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 2,578 (old BV = 1,452)
Cost per BV: 4,630.51
It wouldn't be so far fetching and annoying to look at. Yours are just under gunned and over armored, like the 3025 Banshee which was called the "White Elephant" (it was a reference, that the mech was fast, under gunned, and moderately armored for an assault tank...like your 200 ton vehicles). If you packed more guns and less armor like the example I give (3 AC/20...OUCH!), it would be a kind of "Cool, that's interesting." Even dinking around with the example I give, I could swap to 3 LRM 20 and 16 SRM-6..at long range it can at least put out reasonable damage and if anyone gets close its dirt napping time...but my tank has both high fire power and decent armor without being boring, not low damage and a boring thick armored brick to shoot at (seriously, if it where table top I would just walk away cause it would be so boring to shoot at your tanks).
|
Karagin
06/03/13 04:22 PM
50.36.82.183
|
All excellent points.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Maurer
06/04/13 02:36 AM
142.11.67.185
|
Quote:
As I have said in other posts, cost for military designs really isn't an issue most of the time for Clans or major houses; given the size of Battletech militaries compared to population, that doesn't surprise me either. And since you can come up with a cheaper and/or smaller size unit(s) for any other unit, your hovercraft alternative really isn't that useful.
Cost is a major criteria for military designs, be it Clans, Houses, or real life. If a unit were powerful, but stupidly expense to build, very few would be fielded. Any modern day military would prefer cost and reliability of a weapon or unit, as long as it had an advantage over what the enemy is fielding. If the technology is too expensive, to costly to maintain, or didn't really offer much of a tactical advantage with a high price tag, the military would not continue pursing the design or cease fielding the unit all together (or improve upon the design to satisfactory requirements).
In BattleTech, CV and cost are used as a system of checks and balances. If we had a tabletop match between our two designs with a limit of say only 10 million C-bills (give or take), you could field 4 of your unit. Using a variant of the design I posted to closely match your weapons profile (LRM-15, SRM-4, 2 MGs, 1 ton of ammo for each weapon system, armor and speed remain the same) I could field 10 (new vehicle cost is aproximately 960,000 C-Bills). The match then becomes a battle of speed and numbers vs fire power and armor. I would likely have the upper hand.
Now if the match had a CV limit of say 3200-ish as well, you could still field your 4 tanks, but I would be limited to 6 (new variant CV is 487). I would have to give the match to you, my 6 units have about as much armor or less as one of your units. I would be lucky to knock out one of your tanks before I loose half of mine (excluding randomness of criticals). Factoring in randomness over 100 matchs of the same battle, we'd probably be close to 50 wins/50 losses each.
Don't read too much into the above example, I did it off the top of my head to show a contrast of CV and Cost.
"Captain! We're completely surrounded on all sides." - Kiff, Futurama
..."Excellent, then we may attack in any direction." - Zapp Brannigan, Futurama
"A fool fights a war on two fronts; only an idiot defends on one." - Fusilier
|
Karagin
06/04/13 05:53 PM
50.36.82.183
|
Not much to read into it, you hit it on the head, the monsters he is making would not see combat, they would be expensive to use for fear of losing and if they actually saw combat, they would draw fire from every direction. The idea that you would only lose half or more is about right, BUT it takes very few hits to stop his and turn them into non-moving pillboxes.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
|
|
Extra information
|
0 registered and 97 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: 6511
|
|
|
|
|
|
|