Retry
03/02/14 10:23 PM
67.239.109.174
|
Often called a "Demolisher On Wheels", this tank finds itself at home in urban environments where it can bring many of it's weapons to bear.
----
Devourer Wheeled Tank
IS Introductory Box Set
80 tons
BV: 1,385
Cost: 3,135,767 C-bills
Movement: 3/5 (Wheeled)
Engine: 220 (Fusion, since you want this labeled as such)
Internal: 40
Armor: 280
Internal Armor
Front 8 70
Right 8 55
Left 8 55
Rear 8 40
Turret 8 60
Weapons Loc Heat
Medium Laser TU 3
Medium Laser TU 3
Medium Laser TU 3
Medium Laser TU 3
AC/20 TU 7
LRM 15 TU 5
Ammo Loc Shots
AC/20 Ammo BD 5
AC/20 Ammo BD 5
AC/20 Ammo BD 5
LRM 15 Ammo BD 8
LRM 15 Ammo BD 8
LRM 15 Ammo BD 8
Carrying Capacity:
One battle armor squad
|
Karagin
03/02/14 10:24 PM
70.118.139.48
|
I say drop one of the Mediums and put the weight into a bigger infantry bay.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/02/14 10:25 PM
67.239.109.174
|
I'm not sure what's up with the BA squad. It doesn't have an infantry bay. Maybe they ride on it? I don't know.
|
ghostrider
03/02/14 10:28 PM
24.30.128.72
|
The lack of a second ac 20 doesn't feel right for a 'demolisher' variant.
With the lrm pack, it feels more like a larger version of the patton, or von luckner.
It does address some issues with the demolisher, namely what happens when you run out of ammo.
|
Retry
03/02/14 10:29 PM
67.239.109.174
|
It's not a demolisher or a variant of it.
|
ghostrider
03/02/14 10:30 PM
24.30.128.72
|
Often called a "Demolisher On Wheels",
ok.
|
Retry
03/02/14 10:32 PM
67.239.109.174
|
The Von Luckner is sometimes referred to as a Battlemech without Legs.
That doesn't make it a Battlemech without Legs.
|
Karagin
03/02/14 10:46 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Quote:
I'm not sure what's up with the BA squad. It doesn't have an infantry bay. Maybe they ride on it? I don't know.
Carrying Capacity:
One battle armor squad
So the carrying capacity is for the outside of the vehicle? How does that work for the rules?
Hence why dropping the extra medium laser, and the extra heat sinks, would give you 3 tons on top of what the carrying capacity thus it could carry more BA.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
03/02/14 10:50 PM
24.30.128.72
|
It has the hand holds omni mechs have for carrying battle armor? Or maybe they are to help protect the tank from incoming fire?
Guessing you click on something, or maybe the program has an error in it..
|
Retry
03/02/14 10:56 PM
67.239.109.174
|
Perhaps.
Hmm, maybe it means that it can have BA beside it in the same hex. Basically meaningless.
Anyways, this is an urban tank and not an APC/IFV.
|
Karagin
03/02/14 11:10 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Maybe they ride on it like Russian Infantry did in WW2...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/02/14 11:16 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Code: BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Devourer Mk99
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3060
Config: Wheeled Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Standard design
Mass: 80 tons
Power Plant: 220 DAV Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
3 Medium Lasers
1 Autocannon/20
2 LRM 10s
1 Small Laser
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Devourer Mk99
Mass: 80 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 40 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: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 4.00
Crew: 6 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 3.00
Armor Factor: 280 pts Standard 0 17.50
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 8 70
Left / Right Sides: 8 55/55
Rear: 8 40
Turret: 8 60
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
3 Medium Lasers Turret 9 3 3.00
1 Autocannon/20 Turret 0 15 2 17.00
2 LRM 10s Turret 0 24 3 12.00
1 Small Laser Front 1 1 .50
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 9 80.00
Items & Tons Left: 12 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 3,086,417 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 1,363 (old BV = 845)
Cost per BV: 2,264.43
Weapon Value: 1,400 / 1,400 (Ratio = 1.03 / 1.03)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 35; MRDmg = 13; LRDmg = 5
BattleForce2: MP: 3W, Armor/Structure: 0 / 11
Damage PB/M/L: 4/5/1, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 14
Specials: if
I think this one works better then having the single LRM15 rack, plus you are not losing weight to extra heat sinks.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/02/14 11:21 PM
67.239.109.174
|
The LRM15 rack fit well on the chassis, and I didn't feel cheap enough to just stack 3 LRM5s on it to gain a free ton.
Your LRMs have the same damage potential as my LRMs overall, you just have a slightly higher DPS with yours. And the small laser is nearly useless compared to the ML it could have had.
|
Karagin
03/02/14 11:36 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Yes you over paid for that Medium Laser by losing two tons to two extra heat sinks, were as the use of the dual 10 rack and the Small laser allows the full use of the lost weight and still gives you more over all firepower.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/02/14 11:50 PM
67.239.109.174
|
It gives
The thing is, in the long run there is no "more overall firepower". 3 tons of LRM ammo is 360 missiles regardless of the rack. Once that gets exhausted the LRMs will have dealt roughly the same amount of damage. And then at close range, where it wants to be, it beats yours by a bit.
Plus the quad ML turret mount will look better than the triple ML mount because of it's symmetry.
|
Karagin
03/02/14 11:53 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Yeah not seeing the symmetry thing and I am going with part that says having that 4th medium cost you 3 tons where as the SL only cost you the weight of the laser nothing more. The two LRM10s give you a better chance of hitting vs the single LRM15 and if you want symmetry you should have gone with 3 LRM5s.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
03/02/14 11:56 PM
24.30.128.72
|
main advantage of 2-10 packs is if you split fire. Looks like the 15 pack has more ammo.
For a urban vehicle, the lrms sound like a liability. Yes you can indirect fire them, and thunder ammo is usable, but dangerous to the city people as well as the enemy.
If it comes down to lasers only, then the quads have the advantage.
|
Karagin
03/03/14 12:02 AM
70.118.139.48
|
Not at the cost two extra tons lost to heat sinks.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/03/14 12:03 AM
67.239.109.174
|
The SL is also mounted on the front and nearly useless in most circumstances.
I could have my 2 MLs on either side of the AC/20. That'd be a pretty aesthetically pleasing tank. With yours, I'd have 1 on each side but where would you put the last one? Coaxial? Above or below it? It wouldn't look nearly as good as the quad ML one.
The LRM10s give you a better chance to hit with at least one. But if you want to play that game, having two of them also means a greater chance you miss with at least one.
3 LRM5s as I said earlier feels like the cheap way out. I refuse to use them instead of a larger rack when possible.
|
ghostrider
03/03/14 12:07 AM
24.30.128.72
|
I would think the tank would be dead before it comes down to just mls.
Looks don't normally win battles.
Then again, the extra fire from the lasers might just avoid the running out of ammo.
|
Retry
03/03/14 12:16 AM
67.239.109.174
|
The multiple lasers would allow the AC/20 to use a lot of specialty ammo like precision ammo for shorter conflicts. Otherwise you'd stick with standard ammo.
Looks do win battles for Fighter aircraft. At least it gives a good impression if they'll be any good.
Speaking of which.
What annoys the hell out of me is the Hellcat Aerospace Fighter.
"...[T]he Hellcat subscribes to the school of thought that even a brick will fly if it has enough thrust."
Well, I hope you aren't using those in an atmosphere!
(And of course due to technicalities, all the ASF fly basically the same on the board game, with all the drag and whatnot having really no difference... so you CAN fly them in atmosphere!)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
03/03/14 09:03 AM
172.56.39.215
|
Since this is for city fighting I would ditch the forth medium laser with the extra heat sinks and the LRM-15.
I would put in five SRM-4s one in the turret the rest in the front. That would give you four tons of ammo which gives you 20 shots for each SRM-4. I did not use SRM-6s because of the ammo loss that SRM-6s have.
I thought about some machine guns but that is what infantry are for.
With all the weapons in the turret you can only engage one firing ark. Splitting the weapons into two locations you can engage enemies in two firing arks.
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!!!
|