Karagin
07/07/13 12:59 PM
72.178.85.122
|
Working off of the Banger I posted in the Mayhem thread, and taking some suggestions sent to me on improving it some here is a 75 ton version that is a bit more useful and could possible be built by the Clans versus the 200 ton POJ called the Mayhem:
Code:
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Banger 33C
Tech: Clan / 3060
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 2, Standard design
Mass: 75 tons
Power Plant: 225 XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Ferro-Fibrous
Armament:
4 Adv. Tact. Msl. 12s
2 ER Medium Lasers
1 ECM Suite
2 Anti-Missile Systems
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Banger 33C
Mass: 75 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 40 pts Standard 0 7.50
Engine: 225 XL Fusion 1 5.00
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 2.50
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 4.00
Crew: 5 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 3.00
Armor Factor: 173 pts Ferro-Fibrous 1 9.00
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 8 51
Left / Right Sides: 8 35/35
Rear: 8 23
Turret: 8 29
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
4 Adv. Tact. Msl. 12s Turret 0 55 5 39.00
2 ER Medium Lasers Front 10 2 2.00
1 ECM Suite Body 0 1 1.00
2 Anti-Missile Systems Turret 0 24 3 2.00
1 C.A.S.E. Equipment Body 0 .00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 13 75.00
Items & Tons Left: 7 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 13,382,250 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 2,364 (old BV = 1,962)
Cost per BV: 5,660.85
Weapon Value: 1,720 / 1,720 (Ratio = .73 / .73)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 58; MRDmg = 43; LRDmg = 5
BattleForce2: MP: 3T, Armor/Structure: 0 / 7
Damage PB/M/L: 13/9/4, Overheat: 0
Class: GH; Point Value: 24
Specials: ecm
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/07/13 06:07 PM
208.54.86.233
|
For three million C-Bills I would rather buy a mech. At least a mech cant be destroyed by a child with a one tenth of a C-Bill Molotov cocktail.
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
07/07/13 08:51 PM
72.178.85.122
|
Actually a mech can be destroyed by a Molotov cocktail if used right, so that point is a bit mute, since fire is the nemesis for mechs as it is for vehicles.
Note I said better design NOT perfect, it's is going to be expensive when I used all the goodies the Clans have to offer, now I don't see them building it, but it's a lot better then the POJ called the Mayhem and noting I said it stands a better chance of seeing production vs the Mayhem ever would. Hence it can be worked further down to a more useful vehicle.
But you are correct 3 million CBs could indeed buy you a mech and it could most likely kill this vehicle pretty quick, but at the same time what would your mech carry etc...for the 3 million CBs?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/07/13 10:31 PM
208.54.38.239
|
Sorry a typing error on my part. I meant thirteen million not three million.
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!!!
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/07/13 10:50 PM
208.54.38.239
|
Here is a mech that costs less than your tank at the cost of eleven million C-Bills to your thirteen million C-Bills. It is no faster than your tank so one cant accuse me of trying to use a faster mech to out flank your tank.
If you would want to test battle this mech in a testing program ageist your tank remember that it carried harden armor and not standard armor.
Technology Base: - Inner Sphere - Level 3
Equipment Mass 100
Internal Structure: -endo steel
Engine: 300
Walking MP: 3
Running MP: 4
Jumping MP: 0
Heat Sinks: 13(26) double
Gyro: 1.5 XL
Cockpit: 3
Armor Factor: Hardened 307 38.5
Internal Armor/armor
Structure Value
Head 3/9
Center Torso 31/50
Center Torso(rear) 12
R/L Torso 21/35
R/L Torso(rear) 7
R/L Arm 17/34
R/L Leg 21/42
Weapons and Ammo L Tonnage
Gauss Rifle RT 7 15
GR Ammo LT 3 3
ER Large Laser RA 2 5
ER Large Laser LA 2 5
AMS LT 1 .5
AMS RT 1 .5
AMS ammo CT 1 1
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
07/07/13 10:51 PM
72.178.85.122
|
Okay. You know at 3 million a mech you could take out the tank with almost a company of mechs, I dare say it would be an interesting fight and one that would either be fun to watch or a nightmare to play.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ATN082268
07/07/13 11:47 PM
69.129.18.69
|
Name calling for other people's designs is childish and pointless in making your design look better. If someone else's design is truly a piece of junk, for example, then comparing your design to it doesn't make your design look better as virtually any other design would be better. If you're wrong about someone else's design being a piece of junk, then you look foolish as you're wrong plus your design may actually be inferior to it.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/08/13 12:36 AM
208.54.38.239
|
Quote:
Name calling for other people's designs is childish and pointless in making your design look better. If someone else's design is truly a piece of junk, for example, then comparing your design to it doesn't make your design look better as virtually any other design would be better. If you're wrong about someone else's design being a piece of junk, then you look foolish as you're wrong plus your design may actually be inferior to it.
I would not say calling your design a piece of junk as name calling that is just offering up an opinion of a design that is strongly negative as such I would not define that as being childish. As for your point that if someone calls your design a POJ and offers up another design that is even worse, well... I would have to agree with you on that point.
Since no one, that I have seen, has agreed with you that your designs would be affectable as the rules for BT goes; have you considered that you might want to reconsidered your possession about your extra heave tanks?
I my self like vehicles like you seem to but what I like are light cheap vehicles that can be used is vast swarms at relative low costs, at least in C-Bills. One can accuse me of being a tipical general/politician in the BT universe of having the opinion of life is cheap weapons cost money since I throw large numbers of tank crews into a battle with mechs vastly more powerful than the tanks are.
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
07/08/13 06:16 AM
72.178.85.122
|
Actually ATN your design IS a Piece of Junk, there is no getting around that. And it is not childish or a personal attack on you, I find your super heavy monster tanks to be junk.
The Banger is offered as a way to show that your design COULD BE built with in the rules and possible be a better vehicle and actually see a way to make better vehicles that folks can use. I never said the Banger was perfect, in fact I have three other variants of it and still am tinkering with it. What my vehicle offers over your POJ is that it is cheaper, it is smaller and comes very close to the same mission profile as yours. What it doesn't have is the insane amount of armor, the slow speed, the larger crew, the hideous cost and the fact that it has the off chance of being built versus your POJ that is nothing more then a drunken engineers wet dream gone wrong.
A burnt out Volvo in the Sahara looks better then your monster heavy tanks.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
07/08/13 06:55 AM
72.178.85.122
|
Nice mech, and it would most likely kill the Banger in 3 to four turns, first via a mobility hit, then gutting on section or another. Not to say the mech will walk way clean and free of damage but the battle is already weighted against the tank since the to hit location table for vehicles is bias to mechs.
Still would be fun to try out. And again please note that the Banger is not a finished item, it is more of a showing that you don't need 200 tons of junk to make a decent tank, and yes it's expensive and that is a major stumbling point for many.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
07/08/13 06:57 AM
72.178.85.122
|
Oh and how is the Banger inferior to your 200 ton monster?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
07/08/13 08:13 AM
70.209.6.7
|
Quote:
For three million C-Bills I would rather buy a mech. At least a mech cant be destroyed by a child with a one tenth of a C-Bill Molotov cocktail.
Neither can vehicles. Inferno attack rules changed radically in 2007 when Total Warfare was published.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/08/13 02:00 PM
208.54.38.244
|
Quote:
Quote:
For three million C-Bills I would rather buy a mech. At least a mech cant be destroyed by a child with a one tenth of a C-Bill Molotov cocktail.
Neither can vehicles. Inferno attack rules changed radically in 2007 when Total Warfare was published.
Yes they are better but still vehicles are a great deal more vulnerable to fire attacks than mechs are. Mechs have openings at joints where they should be more vulnerable to fire so should be more vulnerable to fire attacks. Modern tanks can be hit by tank mounted flame throwers and are not affected in the least as long as all hatches are closed and sealed. Vehicle and mech fire rules should be reversed where tanks are unaffected by fire and mechs can be destroyed.
Yes I know, BT is about battle mechs and as such no mater how unrealistic they have to be the most powerful force in the game. I guess I just like bashing my head against stone walls because I just have this thing for logical thinking in a game that would not exist if people used real world logic to create the games rules like how can anyone miss something that is 30 feet tall and ten feet wide that cant move faster than 40 MPH from a couple of hundred feet away. =p
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!!!
Edited by His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey (07/08/13 02:10 PM)
|