Karagin
01/22/02 08:27 PM
63.173.170.97
|
Ok, we know the SLDF left with armor, armored cars, hovercraft etc...we know they did build new vehicles (the vehicles used by the Dragoons and the ones in TR3060). Now my question and idea here is this:
Did they upgrade the older SLDF vehicles or not? If they did do this what would the "newier" versions look like? And who around here has done up Clan versions of the IS vehicles that would have been around at the time of the departure of the SLDF?
***Note the boldness of the word THAT is to show that I am talking about vehicles in the TR3026 and TR2750, NOT anything in the 3058 Tech Readout.***
So would anyone like to give comments and ideas on what they would do if anything to these older vehicles?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
KamikazeJohnson
01/22/02 09:02 PM
209.202.47.12
|
Considering that at the time of the Star League, 'Mechs were still a fairly new thing (and considering the relative costs of 'Mechs vs vehicles), its fairly likely that Kerensky et al would have set up vehicle factories as well as 'Mech factories as soon as they settled down. These factories would probably have been set up to build vehicles whose designs were currently in use (TR:2750). As with 'Mechs, new models would have been designed as tech level increased, but the old familiar standby's would have been refitted (and the factories retooled) for up-to-date technology. The only reason for the Clans to stop producing a good vehicle design is if they stopped using vehicles altogether (which we know is not the case)
I'm not really sure if the TR:3026 designs would be appropriate (unless we assume they are low-tech versions of pre-existing 2750 designs)
That said, I don't have access to the vehicle TROs, so I have nothing meaningful left to say ;-)
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
KamikazeJohnson
01/22/02 09:19 PM
209.202.47.12
|
Well, I don't have access to the vehicle TROs, but I can tell you what would probably be done, in a general sense...
First, any vehicle with MGs would mount more or add more armor. Ditto for Missile systems. DHSwould be standard on tanks, and by 3050, fusion engines would be standard on tanks, with some mounting XL (if possible). Judging by the majority of Clan designs, my guess is that most of the saved tonnage would be used to increase speed rather than armor or firepower (though all three would increase some)
Basically, you'd have tanks with similar (but more potent) weapons systems, slightly heavier armor, moving much faster.
ooohhhh...picture a Shrek PPC carrier...with clan LPLs, the thing saves 3 tons, and another 15 tons on heat sinks...I'm thinking a fourth LPL (and 5 DHS) which leaves 7 tons free (minus increase in turret size) to add armor or close range weapons...
And I thought a Shrek was scary before!
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
Bob_Richter
01/22/02 09:25 PM
134.121.247.162
|
It seems unreasonable to suggest that Star League Era vehicles would NOT have been refitted by the Clans to use their weapons.
After all, FASA has been telling us for YEARS that they no longer produce old-model weapons.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
Karagin
01/22/02 10:27 PM
63.173.170.65
|
Who isn't using old model weapons? The Clans? Actually in the TR3050 it says they do use older weapons on older designs but they are lighter in weight and space and an example of the lasers is given.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Greyslayer
01/22/02 10:51 PM
137.172.211.9
|
Sorry to bust the bubble there but no 'vehicle' uses double heat sinks. Clan or otherwise. You save a total of 3 tons on a Shrekk with 3 Clan Large Pulse Lasers over the 3025 one, you would have to make sure though that the item in question was in production before the exodus as I know vehicles like the Savannah Master were not.
Greyslayer
|
KamikazeJohnson
01/22/02 10:55 PM
209.202.47.12
|
>>Sorry to bust the bubble there but no 'vehicle' uses double heat sinks<<
Is that just a random FA$A fact or do they bother to give a reason (other than simply to reinforce 'Mech superiority  )? I've never really paid much attention to vehicle rules...
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
Greyslayer
01/22/02 11:21 PM
137.172.211.9
|
*looks at all the LRMs a vehicles can mount and not affect heat*
You seriously believe vehicles need a bigger advantage than that? Vehicles by their efficient use of heat generate no heat using ammo-based weapons (so LRMs, SRMs,autocannons and so on generate nothing). Its only energy weapons that generate heat. I had given an example of a 3025 shreck which replaced two PPCs for a AC20 and a LRM20 to cover all ranges and be more leathal than the original... this is purely because ammo weapons don't generate heat. For the Clans with their Missile weapons like LRMs and standard SRMs being 1/2 mass of the IS counterparts why not just use ammo weapons on a vehicle with the 10 free heat sinks being used by energy weapons.
Greyslayer
|
KamikazeJohnson
01/22/02 11:41 PM
209.202.47.12
|
I was aware of the heatless vehicle mounted missiles and ballistics...I just could see no logical reason (physics-wise)for vehicles to be unable to mount DHS The only reason I could think of was that FA$A wanted to limit (again!) the power of vehicles relative to 'Mechs. I agree that missile carriers can be impressive (especially Clan...eek!), even though they are extremely ammo-dependent.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
Karagin
01/23/02 12:13 AM
63.173.170.65
|
But you are forgetting by that time, tanks and other AFVs would be a lot older then the mechs...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
01/23/02 03:21 AM
134.121.247.162
|
But Nystul and crew went around happily pointing out that that was some kind of mistake. Those weapons are NO LONGER OFFICIAL, and do not appear in the revised TR3050.
-Bob (The Magnificent) Richter
Assertions made in this post are the humble opinion of Bob.
They are not necessarily statements of fact or decrees from God Himself, unless explicitly and seriously stated to be so.
:)
|
Korbel
01/23/02 06:59 AM
172.168.66.182
|
I don't have the stats but I know the Kanga was a SLDF design that predated the exodus.... Its that hovercraft thats famous because of its jump jets.
|
Greyslayer
01/23/02 03:55 PM
137.172.211.9
|
The reason for double heat sinks not being able to work is directly related to its ability to dump heat from ammo weapons and also the negative ability in quite often blowing up when a external heat source (like a bush fire) is applied. The single heat sink is the most efficient you can use on the chassis, couple this with the bulkiness of double heat sinks and you have a couple of okay reasons for discounting double heat sinks from vehicle construction.
Clans as such had no need to place many energy weapons on their chassis for if you look at it they never fought much in the way of a true campaign conflict so why waste tonnage on 'inefficient' heat sink mass once beyond 10 heat capacity? I'd expect tanks more like the Kraken Mech, all ammo and ammo-using weapons.
Greyslayer
|
Cray
01/23/02 04:09 PM
204.245.128.3
|
Vehicles cannot use DHS. A FASA rule. I can't think of any decent fluff explanation. It's just a mech superiority thing. I shudder to think of the energy boat vehicles I could design with DHS.
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.
|
Cray
01/23/02 04:10 PM
204.245.128.3
|
Mechs were over a century old at the inception of the Star League. That means they had more thought and development put into them than today's tanks.
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.
|
Karagin
01/23/02 04:20 PM
63.173.170.124
|
Nystal is an idot he made comments like that and could not understand why folks would get mad when he would do something like that. Same with his the older sourcebooks are flawed line of reasoning.
So if you want to believe him go ahead, I don't and do use the idea since it fits the scope of things.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
08/05/06 03:44 PM
214.13.130.100
|
Another round for this one...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
strife
01/08/07 07:06 PM
216.40.89.182
|
I dunno, I've seen Clan vehicles and they look like wacked-out cartoon tanks from a 50's comic book.
Anyways, I'd say any new vehicles the clannys make would be a single-crew-member operated vehicle.
Clannys are anti-social and don't like fighting alongside each other in a multi-member tank crew.
A one man tank would help explain why clan crew gunnery and driving skill levels are so low.
A lot of levers and buttons and foot-pedals you'd need to operate such an animal, without a neuro helmet it would be quite a task to operate all the fuctions of a vehicle in combat by yourself.
"caliber fifty JUSTICE!"
|