Hogwarts

Pages: 1
Karagin
02/02/14 08:07 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Code:
          BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Hogwarts
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3060
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 2, Standard design

Mass: 70 tons
Power Plant: 280 VOX XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 43.2 km/h
Maximum Speed: 64.8 km/h
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
2 Autocannon/10s
2 SRM 6s
2 Machine Guns
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Hogwarts
Mass: 70 tons

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 35 pts Standard 0 7.00
Engine: 280 XL Fusion 2 8.00
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 4.00
Cruise MP: 4
Flank MP: 6
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 3.50
Crew: 5 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.00
Armor Factor: 192 pts Standard 0 12.00

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 7 50
Left / Right Sides: 7 45/45
Rear: 7 20
Turret: 7 32

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
2 Autocannon/10s Front 0 20 3 26.00
2 SRM 6s Turret 0 15 3 7.00
2 Machine Guns Turret 0 100 3 1.50
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 0 11 70.00
Items & Tons Left: 8 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 10,312,483 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 1,075 (old BV = 662)
Cost per BV: 9,593.01
Weapon Value: 970 / 970 (Ratio = .90 / .90)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 31; MRDmg = 13; LRDmg = 1
BattleForce2: MP: 4T, Armor/Structure: 0 / 8
Damage PB/M/L: 4/3/-, Overheat: 0
Class: GH; Point Value: 11
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
02/02/14 08:10 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Unless it's unavailable, there's few excuses for not having stealth armor on this design.
Karagin
02/02/14 08:17 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
And again I would not use stealth armor on a tank or any vehicle expect a VTOL or Conventional Fighter or Aerospace, so NO it would not be available for this vehicle.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
02/02/14 08:21 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
*except*

You being so stubborn doesn't make it unavailable for the vehicle.

It's one measly switch to use your spare heat sinks without any addition to tonnage costs at all. It could make this overly expensive and undergunned design at least bearable. What's with you and your resentment for stealth armor under every possible circumstance?
Karagin
02/02/14 08:26 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I would not use it, and no one I know would use it on a tank. It is not something that would be used on a tank that is going to give away it's postion the second it moves and can't hide the heat of it's engine or where it's fired from or the tracks it lays. Having Stealth armor isn't going to help it much since the idea of the miss-named stealth armor is to confuse radar and other things like that and most gunners will use Mark One Eyeball if the computers fail to do what is needed to be done, that comes with training.

Large target moving isn't going to just vanish and a smart crew will still engage the damn thing, unless you are suggesting Retry that gunnery training in the BT universe is so tied into a computer system that the soldiers can't think for themselves.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
02/02/14 08:44 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Null Sig System masks it's heat... It's fluffed to do so...

At least it was hidden, and even while it's not it is still going to be benefitting by stacking extra modifiers to enemies at long and medium ranges.

Only obvious weapons like lasers and missiles would make the position clear after one fires. A non-tracer autocannon shell being fired would still be difficult to track, perhaps a PPC as well.

Are you suggesting that the man using a Mark One Eyeball will achieve an accuracy level near that of advanced computer systems? If not, then the stealth armor has done it's job quite well.(And if so, the computers aren't doing theirs)

Even battletech doesn't seem to think so, seeing that support vehicles require advanced fire control systems to hit anything with a degree of accuracy.

I'm not sure what you are arguing about, as long as you can fit a guardian ECM suite you will get the benefits at longer ranges for basically free...
Karagin
02/02/14 09:43 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Uhmm may I further suggest you look up footage of tank firing it's main gun, the muzzle blast is VERY visible and I am saying that if they can see the target through a scope they will still fire on it with hope of hitting it, since the chance of taking out the enemy far out weighs being taken out.

If you want to use stealth on your stuff feel free, I don't see the need for it on a tank or any AFV. As said I would find it more useful on a VTOL or other aircraft but not on an AFV. Again each of us has their own design theories.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
02/02/14 09:53 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Design theory:Unused heat sinks are a waste
You have unused heat sinks
Therefore your design is wasteful.
All.You.Have.To.Do.Is.Add.Bloody.Stealth.Armor
Karagin
02/02/14 10:06 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Really? You need to act like a two year old with the single word sentences...nice job.

I don't have to do anything. I don't have to use the heat sinks, I don't have to use stealth, again if it's NOT to your liking and you want to use the design change it to your taste. While I don't mind suggestions, I am not seeing the point of using something that isn't going to be game changer for the vehicle and since it was never setup to be a unit that needed to hide I don't see the need for it. As for the unused heat sinks it happens, not every design needs to have them and sometimes energy weapons are not available and MGs work FAR better against infantry.

So did this help you out or not?
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
02/02/14 10:19 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It should only take single word sentences to get the concept through your head, but you are as stubborn as ATN.

You don't have to do anything, no. You don't need to provide it with a painless addition that will improve an otherwise overexpensive junk so much.(XL engine+nothing to warrant it=bad)

Stealth armor makes shots more difficult at long ranges, it doesn't need to be used with the sole purpose of hiding it, that is just a nice perk.

If it's just infantry you want to kill, SPLs are even better at obliterating them than MGs, and don't need ammo.
Karagin
02/02/14 10:26 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The speed is a good idea of why the XL was used and that does give it a purpose since I don't see you advocating a standard fusion for this one. And just because the one high tech item is used doesn't mean another one needs to be used. If that was the case we would not see standard ACs anymore since all of the other classes of ballastic weapons have made them redundant, yet we still see them, kind of like revolvers, plenty of semi-automatic pistole on the market but folks still stand by the revolver as a side arm over a semi-automatic.

So in this case I am sticking with the MGs since it keeps the price down and are a good anti-infantry weapon and if I were to go with a pule lasers I could only get one SPL and then a small laser, just not seeing that cost increase as a good trade off here, but if you do and are willing to not worry about cost for a player who is building a unit or a BV stand point, then by all means swap them out.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
ghostrider
02/02/14 11:22 PM
66.27.181.51

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It would be easier to just have an ecm tank parked near it. That would solve alot of tanks problems. The ecm can run when the gun fire starts.
Now I do see karagin is a fan of fusion run vehicles.
I agree with retry about unused heatsinks, but only when it deals with mechs. Too bad you can't remove extra heatsinks from a tank and gain some weight or something like it.
Retry
02/02/14 11:30 PM
72.214.204.166

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Lol

A 10 ton vehicle with negative free weight by removing free heat sinks.
Retry
02/02/14 11:32 PM
72.214.204.166

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Hold on..

It's... Speed?

That is a joke, right?
Karagin
02/02/14 11:34 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
That would be a good idea Ghostrider for the ability to remove the heat sinks. And yes Retry the speed is better then what it could have vs what it doesn't have and if you can rebuild it to something better feel free.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
ghostrider
02/02/14 11:34 PM
66.27.181.51

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Limits would be in effect. Might only be a tenth of a ton or something like it.

And the speeding away would be the unit holding the ecm, not the battle tank.
Retry
02/02/14 11:40 PM
72.214.204.166

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
UAC10 and stealth armor, GECM, go crazy with spare tonnage.

Overcharged 3025er to something useful like magic
Karagin
02/02/14 11:49 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Right how about we keep it into some level of BT realism then and not in a further fantasy setting bordering on Star Wars...
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
ghostrider
02/02/14 11:50 PM
66.27.181.51

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
example might be using a Savanha master to hold the ecm instead of a laser. That should allow it to run like hell.

and I agree with the fusion engines. It makes a better tank, since the ice weight is too much. I can see being mounted in a mech being that bad, but a normal vehicle like an everyday car?
Retry
02/02/14 11:53 PM
72.214.204.166

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It is an XLE, not a SFE.
Karagin
02/03/14 06:23 AM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Okay so it is an XL, again IF you can build this one with a standard fusion and allow it to have the same weapons and armor etc...then please do so and post it.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
02/03/14 09:40 AM
72.214.204.166

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Trade the 2 ACs for a UAC.

Voila.
ghostrider
02/03/14 12:33 PM
66.27.181.51

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
That does not maintain the firepower. 2 cannons could fire at the same target, or target 2 units. The ultra could only be used against one. Also, the risk of ammo lock is a factor.

If not for that, then a single ultra could be an alternative. Now adding extra ammo is one thing with that set up, what else would be good for the weight you would gain by losing the second cannon?
Retry
02/03/14 01:22 PM
72.214.204.166

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The UAC is more accurate normally with improved brackets, and if you wanted you could house rule to roll twice on the second shot instead of using a missile cluster table(IMO makes way more sense). There is also the direct hit rule which makes hits with a certain MoS deal more damage and/or provides a bonus.

Even without those the decrease in tonnage would allow the inclusion of a much much cheaper fuel cell engine and make it much more cost effective.
CrayModerator
02/03/14 07:32 PM
71.47.122.85

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Uhmm may I further suggest you look up footage of tank firing it's main gun, the muzzle blast is VERY visible and I am saying that if they can see the target through a scope they will still fire on it with hope of hitting it, since the chance of taking out the enemy far out weighs being taken out.



My recommendation is to start at the rules for your argument and then fall back to fluff. Rules always trump fluff.

BattleTech's stealth armor gives a +1 to-hit the stealthed target at medium range and a +2 to-hit the stealthed vehicle at long range. That's not invisibility, that's just "harder to hit by every unit on the battlefield."

Does that include muffling muzzle blasts and jamming infantry's Mark One Eyeballs? It doesn't matter. +1 at medium, +2 at long. Figure out the fluff later, but deal with the rules first before you get unduly excited about the source of those modest modifiers.
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.
CrayModerator
02/03/14 07:33 PM
71.47.122.85

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
That does not maintain the firepower. 2 cannons could fire at the same target, or target 2 units. The ultra could only be used against one. Also, the risk of ammo lock is a factor.



Vehicles, unlike 'Mechs, can unjam UACs. It's one advantage of their larger crews.
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.
Retry
02/03/14 08:53 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Wait, UACs? I thought that was just RACs that can be unjammed by vehicles.
ghostrider
02/03/14 10:21 PM
66.27.181.51

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Didn't know vehicles could unjam the fast fire cannons at all.
Now the muzzle flash should help negate ecm, since that is NOT something you can jam conventionally. A flash suppressor might work if they make one that size.

Just noticed the cannons are front mounted. That is odd. The srms and mgs are in the turret.

As for using stealth armor, the cost would be something to keep it from popular use.
CrayModerator
02/04/14 06:47 PM
71.47.122.85

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Wait, UACs? I thought that was just RACs that can be unjammed by vehicles.



RACs can be unjammed by any unit. UACs may be unjammed by conventional combat vehicles with enough crew. It's one of the advantages of the sometimes-sizable crews of BT combat vehicles.
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.
Pages: 1
Extra information
0 registered and 118 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: 8034


Contact Admins Sarna.net