l0rDn0o8sKiLlZ
11/17/18 11:41 PM
73.216.131.208
|
Code:
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED
Type/Model: Fear Porpoise
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3060
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Standard design
Mass: 150 tons
Power Plant: 300 Light Fusion
Cruise Speed: 21.6 km/h
Maximum Speed: 32.4 km/h
Armor Type: Hvy Ferro-Fibrous
Armament:
6 LB 5-X ACs
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Fear Porpoise
Mass: 150 tons
Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 90 pts Standard 0 30.00
Engine: 300 Light Fusion 1 14.50
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 7.50
Cruise MP: 2
Flank MP: 3
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 7.50
Crew: 10 Members 0 .00
Armor Factor: 367 pts Hvy Ferro-Fibrous 3 18.50
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 15 80
Front L / R Sides: 15 60/60
Rear L / R Sides: 15 60/60
Rear: 15 47
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 LB 5-X AC Front 0 40 2 10.00
1 LB 5-X AC Front 0 40 1 10.00
1 LB 5-X AC Front 0 40 1 10.00
1 LB 5-X AC Front 0 40 1 10.00
1 LB 5-X AC Front 0 40 1 10.00
1 LB 5-X AC Front 0 40 1 10.00
Infantry Bay Body 1 12.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 0 12 150.00
Items & Tons Left: 23 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 33,886,500 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 1,576 (old BV = 838)
Cost per BV: 21,501.59
Weapon Value: 1,282 / 1,282 (Ratio = .81 / .81)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 25; MRDmg = 22; LRDmg = 12
BattleForce2: MP: 2T, Armor/Structure: 0 / 15
Damage PB/M/L: 2/3/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 16
Specials: tran12
--- Designer's Notes:
-- -- The Fear Porpoise is meant to be more of a joke than a real combat vehicle. Plodding along at a barely acceptable 20~30 km/h, this tracked behemoth is nevertheless skinned in an impressive eighteen and a half tons of Heavy Ferro-Fibrous Armor. Mounting six, count 'em six, LB 5-X Autocannons with two tons of ammo apiece, the Fear Porpoise also brings a withering barrage of small and tiny bullets with which to mince it foes. With a twelve ton Infantry Bay, it can also ride a full four squads of Foot Infantry into the battlefield. Fear the Fear Porpoise!
"Woad Raider, kill things today."
|
happyguy49
11/18/18 05:50 AM
193.37.253.98
|
I think something is wrong with your software, the cannons should not weigh 10 tons each.
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/LB_5-X_AC
7 tons for clantech, 8 tons for spheroid.
Yes, most superheavy's are boondoggles, I bet a 'practical' one could be designed though. Probably with a 400 rated fuel cell, to keep costs down and speed at least at 3/5. I don't know what the max tonnage with that is though, and I suspect one would only get a few tons more available for weapons and equipment because superheavies have such weighty internal structure. I use the freeware Solaris Armor Works which doesn't do superheavys, and I'm usually too lazy to do pen and paper.
|
Karagin
11/18/18 10:20 PM
72.176.187.91
|
Unless he is using the old Tactical Handbook versions. And this vehicle, like ATN's super tanks is not the ultimate anything, and will die fast because it's too slow. All the other side has to do is you artillery, landmines pre-planted or FASCAM/Thunder or call in some airstrikes.
Super heavy tanks and mechs are more of a joke in Battletech then effective.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
11/18/18 10:48 PM
66.74.61.223
|
I believe he has 2 tons of ammo for each added in there.
Otherwise, there should be a listing stating ammo weight.
Though the number of items says 2 for only the top line, not all of them.
|
l0rDn0o8sKiLlZ
11/19/18 06:40 PM
73.160.194.67
|
Huh, that is weird. You're right, it doesn't show the items correctly.
"Woad Raider, kill things today."
|
l0rDn0o8sKiLlZ
11/19/18 06:40 PM
73.160.194.67
|
It is meant to be joke, hence the name Fear Porpoise.
"Woad Raider, kill things today."
|
l0rDn0o8sKiLlZ
11/19/18 06:41 PM
73.160.194.67
|
8 tons per gun at two tons of ammo apiece, for 20 shots of standard and 20 shots of cluster.
"Woad Raider, kill things today."
|
Cray
11/20/18 05:58 PM
97.101.136.19
|
Quote:
-- -- The Fear Porpoise is meant to be more of a joke than a real combat vehicle.
The name alone has brightened my day. 
Quote:
Plodding along at a barely acceptable 20~30 km/h, this tracked behemoth is nevertheless skinned in an impressive eighteen and a half tons of Heavy Ferro-Fibrous Armor.
I find 12-15 tons to be a useful limit for vehicles unless they're operating in a world of BFGs. They'll be critted to death before you really exhaust 15+ tons of armor.
Quote:
Mounting six, count 'em six, LB 5-X Autocannons with two tons of ammo apiece, the Fear Porpoise also brings a withering barrage of small and tiny bullets with which to mince it foes.
LBXs are nasty crit-finders, especially against other vehicles. I tend to lean toward 10s and 20s, but a half-dozen 5s offers a lot of chances to hit with at least some of them, and at good ranges.
Quote:
Fear the Fear Porpoise!
Indeed.
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.
|
ATN082268
11/23/18 10:40 AM
174.255.129.106
|
Quote:
All the other side has to do is you artillery, landmines pre-planted or FASCAM/Thunder or call in some airstrikes.
In the Battletech universe, what you propose can be done about as effectively against other ground units, not just against super heavy units. And how often is it done significantly in player vs player games?
|
Karagin
11/23/18 02:00 PM
72.176.187.91
|
Quote:
Quote:
All the other side has to do is you artillery, landmines pre-planted or FASCAM/Thunder or call in some airstrikes.
In the Battletech universe, what you propose can be done about as effectively against other ground units, not just against super heavy units. And how often is it done significantly in player vs player games?
My group uses it a lot, and several of the other groups I have played in or against have used it, so it's not uncommon and it's all game legal and thus spells the end of any advantage the super heavy tanks give the side using them. And yes it works against other vehicles and mechs, that the cool thing it takes about the ability of the other side to maneuver thus allowing the side having them to gain that back.
ATN, go buy a book about tactical maneuvering and how to use terrain, then apply what you learn to the game, you find that you don't need super heavy tanks or mechs to win and while the 100 ton plus monsters are good and fun to use, they are not the end all you think.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
11/23/18 04:24 PM
66.74.61.223
|
Maybe instead of an infantry bay, you made it amphibious. Then it might really live up to it's name.
As for ATN/Karagin..
Some people do not bounce all over the maps. They tend to do the stand and deliver methods. It could also be, that there are some that do bounce and the only way they can be countered is the mobile fortress of doom concept.
Open maps with little to no terrain, comes to mind as well, with only a few things to hide behind, so only idf can hit.
If you only use speed to get to a new position and hide there trying to fire, then the assaults are the big thing. If you do the run and jump, so nothing can hit you, then the lights and mediums come into their own.
I can see issues where the super heavies can normally go over some things like hills, but if it was in an area that you have only one way a vehicle can get thru, then it would be something you would only send mechs on a mission like that. Or vtols. You know it would be mined and plotted for any art in range.
And with the way the game constantly states, the assaults are the feared units in the game. So the concept of the stand and deliver does get into peoples heads. I can see doing some super heavies as a deterrent to use those bouncers as one set of hits will take them out.
And I will agree, they make great mobile pillboxes, helping defend an area that might have had defenses destroyed in a prior attack.
|
Karagin
11/24/18 12:26 AM
72.176.187.91
|
Everyone plays differently but at the same time, offering a new way to play is to me a better way to enjoy the game. Standing there like it's 1812 and you are facing the English in a single rank of fire kneel, second rank fires etc...till it's your turn again to stand and fire is not Battletech. The mechs/vehicles have speed and weapons for a reason, the point is to use them to gain the advantage over the other side.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
11/24/18 12:48 AM
66.74.61.223
|
As the armor was a factor as well.
When we first started playing the old ways of warfare made sense, as the assault mechs were supposed to be the ultimate machines. The mediums being the work horse dealt with being cheap, and could get a raid done much faster. But the heavy mechs were the ones to guard things, or sent in to destroy things. Even the books gave that a life of it's own.
The player base is what destroyed that concept. Now if they had limited jets to fuel points, it would have. Or made it even harder to fire when using the jets.
I do agree that finding a different way to play does help at times, but it has also hurt as well. The overweight idea shouldn't have come about. There was a limit to weight for a reason, and without extending the engine tables, with it not jumping so much in higher engines, it just doesn't make much sense. Hovers only being 50 tons tops. Even mechs. Now with quads, I could see increasing the weight, but also increasing the weight needed for gyros and such. Even more leg strength, like maybe beefing up IS, adding some extra to it. But it was not meant to be.
If I recall right, some of the fastest warships were the largest of them. Multiple turbines in air craft carriers allowed for faster speeds, yet did not overly increase the engine weights proportionately. Something Battle tech is harshly against. Their own rules make sure that doesn't happen.
Then again, a .5 ton engine that comes with 10 tons of heat sinks doesn't make sense. The shielding solution doesn't hold, as the engine only covers a single sink. The rest have to be placed in crits.
|
ATN082268
11/25/18 01:57 PM
174.255.148.177
|
Quote:
I bet a 'practical' one could be designed though. Probably with a 400 rated fuel cell, to keep costs down and speed at least at 3/5. I don't know what the max tonnage with that is though, and I suspect one would only get a few tons more available for weapons and equipment because superheavies have such weighty internal structure. I use the freeware Solaris Armor Works which doesn't do superheavys, and I'm usually too lazy to do pen and paper.
I'm not sure what you mean by "practical." You might be able to get the lighter of the super heavy units to move 3/5 but I suspect that will make them really expensive or lacking in armor and/or weapons. Cost doesn't seem to be an issue for the great houses/clans though and super heavy units don't seem to be the kind of unit found in typical Mercenary units. Besides, slow units are hardly auto kills in a scenario. Part of it is how they are designed and a lot of it is how they are used. I find it interesting how some people label super heavy units as deathtraps or easy kills but not to other units with similar speeds...
|
Karagin
11/25/18 03:48 PM
72.176.187.91
|
What he means is that the engine tables need to change to allow faster ones. Cost is an issue for the Houses, else all of them would be fielding nothing but the best of the best and they don't.
And yes super slow units are an auto kill. Take a 3025 Atlas, and pit it against anything that moves faster then it, smart money will be on the other side since it will move in an out of ranges and thus to hit mods go up. Prime example, see the Clints vs Warhammer scenario I posted.
You can design a super heavy tank or mech to be amazing and if it can't get to the fight or the fight brought to it, then it's just that a cool theoretical design. Also again the game offers simple and cheap methods to stop them, hell they even talk about HOW do so in the novel about the Grasshopper that is out.
An Atlas is slow and if the player who is facing it uses the speed and other things like terrain or mines or numbers it will die, same for any of the mechs or vehicles that move slow. The super heavies are easier to kill because they don't have the ability to move very fast and if it's a vehicle the to hit table is already weighted against it. Go look at how vehicles take damage ATN, and you will see how fast your's or even this super heavy tank go from being Hey Look I am super tank to hey look I am sitting duck, now to play pillbox and thus do nothing.
ATN, I get it the bigger it is the cooler it is, we all build those things, we have all used them, but the key is the majority of us figured out they are for show and tell only. I really like the Monster from Robotech aka the original Behemoth Battledroid for this game, and it has awesome fire power be it four gauss rifles and lasers and max armor moving 3/5 or a 200 ton super heavy moving 1/2 carrying 4 LongToms (yes I know not possible really or is it?) and 6 Large Lasers etc...all sound impressive and cool, and all are not practical or worth using really no matter what system you use to pick your forces, be it BV or CV or going by tonnage.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
11/25/18 09:29 PM
66.74.61.223
|
I believe some context is needed, as the 3025 atlas didn't have to deal with the higher tech weapons that were around when the super heavies came out. If they were around in the 3025 era, the vehicle version could very well have been top dog. Lrm 20 pack create no heat on vehicles, so just keeping ammo stocked is the issue. Yes, long ranged weapons could pick at it, but barring art, the lrm was the long range weapon.
It isn't like there weren't any 2/3 mechs or vehicles at that time. The Urbanmech comes to mind. A little later the Annihilator comes out. The Behemoth tank, as well as the 3/5 Schrek and a few others were popular. Granted, had the had fuel limits back then, I doubt ICE vehicles would still be around.
Vtols would be the main weapon of choice against them, but then, that could be said of all ground units.
And even the clans had the Direwolf. Big relatively slow target. Yet the Awesome moved just as slow as the Atlas.
But even with that, I would take the atlas over a stinger or wasp. Not bv driven, but any two hits in one location from the mls, and a single hit from the 20 takes some of it out. The CT would destroy it.
The missiles being hard to guess as the spread is the issue.
Now upgrade it with streaks, gauss rifles, pulse lasers and such. That changes a bit.
The weapon choice of the atlas makes it lousy, but not as bad as say the king crab. Ammo is just not something to rely on with a big slow unit.
The super heavies have an issue as heat sinks comes to mind. Especially mechs.
Assaulting a position that isn't on the world they come from. Not worth it. Defending something on their world makes them better then just towers. At least you can push units hiding behind a hill or something like that.
Era being deployed would be a good basis of using them.
|
Karagin
11/26/18 12:24 AM
72.176.187.91
|
Nothing had fuel limits when the game first came out Ghostrider, fuel was not an issue till the mid 2000s. Recall the fighting is 10 second turns so a 10 turn battle is a little over a minute to about two minutes, so fuel is not an issue.
You could build 100 tons that are equal to some of super heavies in purpose and some time close in weapons with 3025 tech, vehicle again have one major flaw, as pointed out, that is the To Hit Table and the amount critical hits a single roll gives you from the sides etc...
You point about better tech weapons doesn't change things for the super heavies. They are still too slow. Also you may want to go read the rules for the mechs, they have more internal space thus they can have more over all if the weight allows it.
Yes the cool mechs move slow and yes you can slag things with them, but again you can still lose with them just as fast if you don't use them right, same with the heavies and going back to your technology point, it's even easier to stop slow moving mechs with minefields dropped by Thunder LRMs or Arrow IV FASCAM rounds, sure you know they are there, but you just lost part of the area of the fight to move around in and thus you are now playing to the other sides tune.
The weapons on the heavy and assault mechs are setup for their speed, you have an AC20 on the Atlas and that means if you get close it kicks your face in. Same with the King Crab. Then you have other assault mechs packing four AC10s or Gauss Rifles and what do we see folks trying to do, they keep RUNNING at their max to get into medium range to engage the enemy vs standing back and waiting for the enemy to come to them using the weapons ranges vs their slower speed.
Same is true with these super heavies, if like ATN's monsters, if you pack them with weapons folks know are a threat they will get singled out fast and quickly dealt with, how ever if you build them to wear they have some punch but more of hey I am big and scary and hi you are now facing 4 AC/20s since you ran up on me, then you have taken the speed issue and the weapons need to heart and built smarter vs flasher. Now the super heavy can still be stopped with the same things that can stop it no matter what, but you have something that is now likely to give you something vs nothing.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
11/26/18 12:29 AM
72.176.187.91
|
As a one off game back in the day, we had a friend who wanted to build a 150 ton mech, he explained why, he thought it was silly mechs had to stop at 100 tons. We were like okay cool you take that mech and we will take four mechs from the TRO3025, and let's see who wins.
So his 150 tonner moved 2/3 had four AC10s 1 PPC and some missiles and some secondary lasers. If I can find the sheet, that is if I have it still, I will double check, and a lot of armor. He was happy. We took 1 Warhammer, 1 Archer, 1 Centurion, 1 Stinger. 8 turns later his mech was down due to a leg getting blown away and him managing to kill his pilot trying to get up, and we had lost the Centurion, blown up. Stinger was missing it's left side and the Warhammer and Archer kept things to range fighting.
Given that we now have rules for these super heavy mechs, I should see if they want to re-run the fight, plus it would be good to see everyone again.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
11/26/18 03:10 AM
66.74.61.223
|
The better tech screws the super heavies, as the range on some make it impossible to engage them, unless you have them, or artillery.
The fuel statement was about vehicle development. Had the fuel issue be there at that time, I believe there would be a whole lot less vehicles in service. The use for movement is the problem. Any lengthy battle that you more around a lot would stop a lot of vehicles from being that effective. Which may be why ammo limits are what they are. Force the vehicles back for refueling.
I agree that the super heavy units are not a great choice if the enemy has prepared properly. The fascam and such was not around in 3025 era, or at least not out in print. And technically, they can use back against you, limiting some of the units. Granted, most mediums have jump jets, to you normally jump over those areas, just remember they are not good to get into.
Not saying it happened in your example, but we all know a single crit, especially on a vehicle back in the beginning of the game, killed vehicles half the time. Ammo and engine explosion, and crew killed hits. So wasting the money and resources to build them was futile. I can understand having these units, but not for combat. Helping repair and build dropships, moving large amounts of cargo, things like that.
A mobile pillbox is nice at times, as long as you know, it is probably dead if any real fighting happens. Good for things like base defense, were you only have mobile ground units to do it with.
|
Karagin
11/26/18 10:54 AM
72.176.187.91
|
I disagree with you on the fuel issues, the game turns are simulating a time period that fuel use is not going to be an issue. 2 minutes of combat doesn't not burn that much fuel in vehicles.
Yes a single crit kills vehicles dead, no matter their size, that has been one of my main points to ATN about why his super heavies are not the end all of anything and how he or anyone for that matter would be better off using smaller vehicles.
Landmines were around in 3025 via Mechwarrior RPG with stats for use in Battletech, they were not easy to toss around and were more of a preplanned thing, but they were there and virbobombs were as well, and one novel mentions them being setup by infantry against mechs.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
11/26/18 11:59 AM
66.74.61.223
|
The mines issue is one that, before the fascam and thunders, had to be set up before the scenario, and could not be replaced or moved during the game. But they are just as deadly as any other weapon system when they go off.
I would have to read up on the fuel for ICE, as I thought it was much like Fighters. Basically a limited amount that is burned with any movement. Which is a hole in vehicles (gee what a surprise) as they do not have fuel tanks for ICE's. Had that been done with the orginal release, then vehicles would not be the 'ultimate' power. The units mech pilots cringe is fear, so they can't have the advantages of things like double sinks and lighter frames.
It is possible the ATN's group plays the slow death machines battling each other in death matches, so there is no real need for speed. It is also his right to post them here, as almost all are. I can see a few being banned, but not much. A little move flavor would be nice, instead of omni clones of the same thing, which might be the route to go. Make up configurations for one unit, instead of all the variants.
One last thought. The military loves to use civilian units in combat to fool the enemy. So I guess field repair trucks and the super heavy units that would be for dropship repairs and such was only a matter of time before being a standard military unit.
But like a lot of things, just because you can do something, doesn't mean it needs to be.
But as said. It is ATN's option to make and post them.
Hmmm. A dropships that can travel along the ground. Might be the ultimate vehicle.
|
Cray
11/26/18 06:06 PM
97.101.136.19
|
Quote:
I would have to read up on the fuel for ICE, as I thought it was much like Fighters.
ICE fuel for ground vehicle is generally ignored in board games and only tracked from maintenance cycle to maintenance cycle (8 hour periods) if using optional Strategic Operations rules.
Quote:
Basically a limited amount that is burned with any movement. Which is a hole in vehicles (gee what a surprise) as they do not have fuel tanks for ICE's.
Tankage is part of the engine mass - 10% of it.
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.
|
|
|
Extra information
|
0 registered and 277 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: 5769
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
