Bob_Richter
11/02/01 07:26 AM
134.121.149.97
|
>>>In reality, I find that vehicles are not more powerful than 'Mechs.<<<
But infernos and stupid construction restrictions should not be the reason for this in my mind...even if vehicles were NOT superior to 'Mechs. (they are, unless everybody's packing infernos.)
>>>Second, change the range rules to be a 1 per range increase.
short: 0
med: 1
Long: 2
You may want to add some ranges.<<<
This is done in Fantech, a project of Lev's and mine to modify the Battletech rules to suit our strange sensibilities. We have nine range categories, so it goes from +0 to +8. Munchboy has the potential to be VERY lethal in these rules.
>>>The percentage could also be factored in with the weight of the engine, rather
than the rating <<<
Genius.
Sheer Genius.
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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.
:)
|
Acolyte
11/02/01 08:58 AM
64.180.214.26
|
FanTech? OOoooo can I play? Sounds fun!
Seriously though.... in my game there are 12 ranges, from +0 to +11. Also, the hexes are 50 meters. An LRM has a max range of just over 4 km.
Also, armor is worked differently. I believe I posted the variant in "designs" a while ago. It was shot down quite soundly, but they work much more realistically. Battles are much shorter due to the extra nastyness. And 'Mechs. They can survive the loss of a location, and most criticals do not knock the unit out of action. Vehicles are universaly at a disadvantage because of this. Criticals are much more common, as is internal damage.
Also, AC's become nasty when you add armor peircing sabots and fragmentary anti-infantry, as well as standard ammo which is O.K. at both. The amount of ammo per ton is expanded to allow for diferrent ammo types in the same 'Mech. The missile systems are also significanly upgraded and versitile.
The infanty is devided into squads and given some teeth. They won't last long against any kind of armor (let alone a 'Mech), but they can do some serious damage if you aren't careful (or from ambush). I've frankensteined the BattleTroops squads into the BattleTech rules.
As I said, I have never met a rules system I haven't modified.
Light a fire for a man, and you keep him warm for one night,
Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Acolyte
|
Karagin
11/02/01 11:01 AM
63.173.170.8
|
1) You have not refuted anything. You keep repeating that IN YOUR OPINION vehicles are better the mechs...prove this please or shut up.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
11/02/01 11:02 AM
63.173.170.8
|
I ICQ you it...should be a short battle...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
11/02/01 11:05 AM
63.173.170.8
|
You are leaving out one thing and it is important...vehicles take most of their damage to one loction when they get hit bases on the arc, where as a mech as it spread out everytime.
So you calulations are way off...try again.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Korbel
11/02/01 03:47 PM
172.146.67.234
|
First> Mechs don't have suspension factors... Vehicles can quite EASILY max out the to hit roll
Two> vehicles don't have a Heat table... Fire away with all 5 ER PPC's and again next turn.. not worrying about shutdown, ammo explosions, or even IR signature...
Three> Turrents can go 360 degrees... Torso's can't (though Mechanically they should be able to.)
four> If you ever have a game by tonnage... Take all 5 ton or less hovercraft or hydrofoils. with a game capped at 400 tons.. you'd have atleast 80 craft all able to go atleast 20 hexes per turn... each with a Med Laser. easily able to get behind ALL the mechs your opponent fields.. a win in 10 turns or less... even with green drivers
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 03:52 PM
134.121.149.97
|
meaningless nonsense.
His calculations are EXACTLY CORRECT.
You see, hit location DOES NOT MATTER, and critical hits are 1 in 18. 1 in 36 of a fatal critical hit. Critical hits from internal structure breaches are rare and basically meaningless (if this happens, the tank is already dead.)
Again, concentrated armor is an ADVANTAGE. I've seen many a 'Mech die from a series of hits that would hardly have phased a well-armored tank.
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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.
:)
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 03:59 PM
134.121.149.97
|
You have done nothing but repeat your opinion. I have countered your points.
Vehicles are faster than 'Mechs, and can be really hard to hit.
Critical hits are not as common as you think. (unless you brought a crit-finder along just for tank-killing, which is actually a good idea, but which is not always done or possible)
(these counter your contention that a vehicle's hit location chart make it dead before it begins to fight.)
Vehicles' heavily concentrated armor is an advantage.
(this countering your inane concept that it is somehow disadvantageous to have more armor in front of a weapon hit)
Infernos are an optional rule (as is fire), and only treaded vehicles can otherwise be affected by fire.
(countering your contention that a 'Mech can always win by mounting infernos or starting fires.)
Do you have other contention?
As to your invitation to prove it, I am planning to do exactly that.
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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.
:)
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:01 PM
134.121.149.97
|
That depends on how I decide to work it.
Hm. SRMs or LRMs. SRMs would be a short battle. LRMs would be a long one....
...more deliberation is necessary. Do I want a short fight or a long one? Either way, I will win, but victory seems more assured if I'm never even shot at.
:)
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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
11/02/01 04:02 PM
63.23.175.251
|
Let's see vehicles have to have enough heat sinks to fire all those ER PPCs...so there is a good chunk of weight tied up in heat sinks and that is with a fusion engine, don't see mechs needing this.
How can having a suspension factor max out the to hit roll? You lost me there...
Wow! Turrets can rotate...cool...they can also get locked in place on a single roll of an elven and that is WITHOUT doing anyting internal to the vehicle...don't see the mechs having this problem...
Numbers will always win....as the Russians.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
11/02/01 04:05 PM
63.23.175.251
|
Hit locations matter Bob...it is you and your brother that are tossing out meaningless drivel...
Having less areas to spread the damage out means that one location will take the brunt of the damage and fail faster. One would think you could see this but I guess not.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:08 PM
134.121.149.97
|
Uh. Nonsense.
For every shot, the vehicle's chance of being destroyed is 1/36.
For every sufficiently powerful shot, the 'Mech's chance of being destroyed is 1/36.
Now, this does make vehicles more vulnerable to crit-finding weapons, but in a duel of Gauss Rifles, the odds are even.
Um. Well. Not exactly. You see, the 'Mech also has a 1/36 chance of being critted in a vital location which can either really mess him up or kill him.
Concentrated armor is an ADVANTAGE!
Cripes! Why is this concept hard to understand?
110 points of armor / 11 locations == roughly 10 points per location! (a Gauss Rifle can breach this 'Mech)
110 points of armor / 5 locations == roughly 55 points per location! (a Gauss Rifle cannot breach this tank)
And, um...vehicles CAN turn...you know that, right?
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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
11/02/01 04:10 PM
63.23.175.251
|
You have not proven that vehicles are better then mechs, you keep leaving out the to hit table of where and what damage does to them (vehicles), you will not listen when I and other point out that the lack of loctions when compared to a mech means one area takes the full brunt of damage thus leading to the death of the vechicle faster then it would a mech.
You don't see to understand that the rules favor the mechs way more then do the vehicles, you also fail to note that the critial hit table on vehicles has far more drastic results then anything on the mechs.
So Bob all you have done is state that you think vehicles are better but the facts don't back this up. Try again.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:10 PM
134.121.149.97
|
>>>
Having less areas to spread the damage out means that one location will take the brunt of the damage and fail faster. <<<
But has nothing to do with criticals.
'Sides, it's not true.
It will take the brunt of the damage, but the difference is that it CAN. Vehicles have no less armor than 'Mechs (except by design.) It's just not spread as thin. One would think you could see this but I guess not.
The vehicle HitLoc table ALSO means that if one of my sides is really battered, I can just show you another one and have NO FEAR WHATSOEVER of you hitting the damaged side.
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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
11/02/01 04:11 PM
63.23.175.251
|
If you say so Bob, if you say so...you know all there is to knwo about war and tactics...this I forgot.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
11/02/01 04:13 PM
63.23.175.251
|
You have not proven that vehicles are better then mechs, you keep leaving out the to hit table of where and what damage does to them (vehicles), you will not listen when I and other point out that the lack of loctions when compared to a mech means one area takes the full brunt of damage thus leading to the death of the vechicle faster then it would a mech.
You don't see to understand that the rules favor the mechs way more then do the vehicles, you also fail to note that the critial hit table on vehicles has far more drastic results then anything on the mechs. Things like loss of mobility, locked turret, etc...all with out scoring any internal hits...
So Bob all you have done is state that you think vehicles are better but the facts don't back this up. Try again.
Cause all you are doing is showing a lack of understanding the rules here Bob.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:14 PM
134.121.149.97
|
>>>How can having a suspension factor max out the to hit roll? You lost me there...<<<
Speed. As I pointed out, a 5 ton wheeled vehicle goes 4/6 WITHOUT AN ENGINE.
How hard do you think it is to get it up to 7/11? 10/15?
Hovercraft and VTOLs are worse.
>>>Wow! Turrets can rotate...cool...they can also get locked in place on a single roll of an elven and that is WITHOUT doing anyting internal to the
vehicle...don't see the mechs having this problem...<<<
It's also exactly the same chance as critting the thing. 1 in 18. Not going to happen very often, even if you ARE using LB-X clusters to the exclusion of all else. A locked turret isn't really a big deal either, just a nuisance.
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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
11/02/01 04:16 PM
63.23.175.251
|
Once again Bob you show that you have no idea of what you are tossing out.
Locations matter as does the idea that once the internal sturcture of a vehicle is hit it dies...the loss of a loction doesn't kill a mech out right, UNLESS some thing drastic happens, but for the most part the mech can lose and arm or a torso and still be there to fight it out, but if a vehicle loses a location it's dead...so yes Bob it does matter.You have not proven that vehicles are better then mechs, you keep leaving out the to hit table of where and what damage does to them (vehicles), you will not listen when I and other point out that the lack of loctions when compared to a mech means one area takes the full brunt of damage thus leading to the death of the vechicle faster then it would a mech.
You don't see to understand that the rules favor the mechs way more then do the vehicles, you also fail to note that the critial hit table on vehicles has far more drastic results then anything on the mechs. Things like loss of mobility, locked turret, etc...all with out scoring any internal hits...
So Bob all you have done is state that you think vehicles are better but the facts don't back this up. Try again.
Cause all you are doing is showing a lack of understanding the rules here Bob.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:16 PM
134.121.149.97
|
No. But I do know a good bit about Battletech, which is NOT war and bears only a vague resemblance to tactics.
However, DO NOT ACCEPT ME ON AUTHORITY!
I am not an authority, nor do I ever accept them myself. I'm on ICQ now. Give me your 'Mech force, and let's get this show on the road!
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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
11/02/01 04:17 PM
63.23.175.251
|
If you say so...your math is way off, yet you keep at it...how nice...You have not proven that vehicles are better then mechs, you keep leaving out the to hit table of where and what damage does to them (vehicles), you will not listen when I and other point out that the lack of loctions when compared to a mech means one area takes the full brunt of damage thus leading to the death of the vechicle faster then it would a mech.
You don't see to understand that the rules favor the mechs way more then do the vehicles, you also fail to note that the critial hit table on vehicles has far more drastic results then anything on the mechs. Things like loss of mobility, locked turret, etc...all with out scoring any internal hits...
So Bob all you have done is state that you think vehicles are better but the facts don't back this up. Try again.
Cause all you are doing is showing a lack of understanding the rules here Bob.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
11/02/01 04:20 PM
63.23.175.251
|
First I am not on my computer...Let's start on Monday that way we have a week to play if it takes that long...but I can give you my force right now, Highlander, S-hawk, Falcon, Panther.
Battletech is a simulation of war, and while not perfect it does show some things pretty close. You are failing to grasp things is showing that you have not understood any of the books you have read on tactics etc...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:21 PM
134.121.149.97
|
>>>You have not proven that vehicles are better then mechs, <<<
I intend to do this with our battles. I only counter your points. You only repeat yourself.
Ad nauseum. When are we going to shut up and stop wasting Nic's server space?
I'm for now.
>>>you keep leaving out the to hit table of where and what damage does to them (vehicles),<<<
No I don't. Vehicles concentrated armor compensates them bloody well for their lack of locations. A 'Mech missing a location is either dead, the next best thing to dead, or has only been shot in the arm. So a vehicle's dead! Guess what. It takes more to do it.
>>>thus leading to the death of the vechicle faster then it would a mech.<<<
You've said this. It makes no sense and you cannot prove it.
Vehicles have NO ARMOR RESTRICTIONS. Has this missed you somehow? A tank's location is ALWAYS harder to breach than a 'Mech's (except by design.)
>>>You don't see to understand that the rules favor the mechs way more then do the vehicles,<<<
You have not shown this.
>>>you also fail to note that the critial hit table on vehicles has far
more drastic results then anything on the mechs. Things like loss of mobility, locked turret, etc...all with out scoring any internal hits...<<<
A 'Mech can lose mobility with a hit series that wouldn't phase a tank (ref: the last Locust I piloted.) thin armor does that to you.
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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.
:)
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:23 PM
134.121.149.97
|
>>>Locations matter <<<
Not to critical hits, except to say that a tank will take less.
>>>you keep leaving out the to hit table of where and what damage
does to them (vehicles)<<<
No I don't, and you're repeating yourself.
You're discounting the advantages of concentrated armor.
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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
11/02/01 04:24 PM
63.23.175.251
|
You have not countered anything Bob, you have stated why you don' like things, thus you end up repeating your self time and time again.
Your examples are not the norm and thus fall in the area of maybes and what ifs...the norm tells us that vehicles as written are not the god like machines you claim they are. So how about you stop repeating your opinions and get on with the facts of the matter, YOU don't like vehicles in the game.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:24 PM
134.121.149.97
|
>>>your math is way off<<<
How do you figure?
For the rest...stop repeating yourself, Karagin, and just give me that list of humanoids I'm going to kill.
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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
11/02/01 04:26 PM
63.23.175.251
|
Bob they matter and no I am not forgetting vehciles have lots of armor...you are forgeting that they have less areas to spread the damage out and avoid taking hits that will kill them like mechs do.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
11/02/01 04:29 PM
63.23.175.251
|
It's off because you are leaving out the idea that the damage ends up hitting a limted area, 4 to 5 loctions, compared to 12 on a mech, actually 24 since the mech can take internal hits and still be alive.
And I gave you the list below...so how about you stop trying to play medicnce man and give me the list of trash cans you are going to use...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:30 PM
134.121.149.97
|
Battletech is a war game, not a simulation. Real-world tactics have little application in Battletech. Some of them can be modified to be effective, but there are more effective ones inherent to the system itself.
Warfare in the 31st century is as different from warfare in the 21st Century as warfare in the 21st Century is from warfare in the 11th Century. Different tools, different tactics....unless you think a cavalry charge makes good sense in a war that uses automatic rifles?
Perfect. I have your lance. Um. I need actual model numbers for those 'Mechs, though.
(note that to prove my point, I may have to use customs.)
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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.
:)
|
Bob_Richter
11/02/01 04:32 PM
134.121.149.97
|
I like vehicles. They're great. They kill 'Mechs like gangbusters.
THAT's what I don't like.
Every point of mine is a counter (if not a refutation) for a point of yours, but I will stop repeating myself.
Try countering MY points, and we could have an actual debate.
-Bob Richter
A dead primate is nobody's ancestor.
-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
11/02/01 04:32 PM
63.23.175.251
|
No custom units straight books or are you afraid you will lose fast that way?
Battletech like any war game, is a simulation Bob, are you sure you are uptodate on things?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|