His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/27/08 09:25 AM
99.204.45.32
|
cost 760,410
LPL variant 582,910
tech level IS L3
chassis Hover
tank weight 21t
engine 80 fusion 3.75t
cruse speed 10
Flank speed 15
Heat sinks 10 0t
Lift/rotor/other 2.1t
control 1.05t
IS 2.1t
Armor 80p 5
Front 3/40
LT/RT 3/16
Back 3/8
Turret N/A
Weapons/ammo
PPC Front 7
variant
Large Pulse Laser front 7
This is a vehicle design that Assinine Industrys has come up with for fast attack missions. The vehicle is not in production yet. Assinine Industrys wants to see if there is any interest in the design before a manufacturing plant is built to manufacture the 80 rated fusion engine. The large pulse laser variant will not be offered from Assinine Industrys. Assinine Industrys does not have the manufacturing ability to build such an advanced weapon. The vehicle is able to have the large pulse laser installed as a retrofit.
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!!!
|
Dester
07/28/08 12:26 PM
216.57.96.1
|
Isn't there a stipulation that that the engine must weight at a minimum 30% of a hovercrafts weight?
That aside, mounting a single large, long range weapon w/ out a turret negates the hovercraft chassis major advantage, speed.
Food for thought.
Dester
|
Lafeel
07/28/08 12:30 PM
157.157.83.10
|
The Saladin and Savannah Master designs would argue otherwise, as neither of them have a turret.
As for the infamous 30% rule, I'm going to have to admit I'm not entirely sure if it exists any more, nor entirely sure where to find it in the tech manual.
|
Dester
07/28/08 12:40 PM
216.57.96.1
|
30% rule
Battletech compendium, in the lift equipment table section.
Lets be honest, the savana master just flat out didn't have room for a turret  But in both cases, they both have short range weapondry to let them dart in, blast away and then dart back out.
Dester
|
Lafeel
07/28/08 12:45 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Indeed. Which could be used to make a case for you being able to skip the turret if your vehicle is fast enough (and this vehicle is faster than the Saladin)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/28/08 02:27 PM
70.0.114.213
|
The rule is 20%. *At least in my copy* I use ICE engine weights for that rule. If a Fusion or XL fusion engine is used I don't demand a bigger engine to be required just to satisfy the rule. A 80 rated ICE engine is 5 tons so a 80 rated engine no mater what kind works in a 25 ton or less hover craft.
As for the turret. VTALs and hover craft are the best vehicles that can go with out a turret. There fast enough to bring the weapon to bare.
Whats wrong with darting in and out with a weapon that has even more range? There is even less of a chance that you will be hit by return fire.
My 15 ton hover infantry carrier carries 3 med lasers.
http://www.sarna.net/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/151235/an/0/page/0#151235
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!!!
|
Dester
07/29/08 06:45 PM
216.57.96.1
|
Your correct, its 20%, but its a minium weight that the engine must weigh, period. So your design is illegal with a 3.75 engine. It must allocate 4.2 tons at a miniumum. Doesn't matter if its ICE or fusion. And before you ask, this is consistant with the old books and new books with better clarification in the new books to be a mimimum weight... period.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/30/08 10:21 AM
70.6.175.127
|
That rule that you have to have a more powerful engine just because you are using a fusion engine make no sense at all. In this case why is a 80 ICE engine fine but a 80 fusion engine to weak to lift that same exact hovercraft? I know, thats logic, and in BT there is no room for logic. If logic was brought into the game the first thing to go are the battle mechs them self's.
Well since I will only be playing with friends aka no tournaments. That is when I cane get out of this %&^% truck and live in my house again. I can play with what ever house rules that me and the other people agree to. Which one of them will be hover craft engines min weights will be decided by what the weight of a ICE engine is. I find it funny that VTALs have no min engine requirements and hover craft do. Unless someone nosiest that also and changed it.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/30/08 01:28 PM
157.157.83.10
|
I have a sneaky suspicion that it may have something to do with those two words that a lot of people (present company not included, I hope) loathe to hear, namely "game balance".
Mind you I am not sure if that rule exists any more, mostly because the jes-1 violates it. A 50 ton hovertank with a 15 rated engine sure does not sound like 20% to me..
edit: No, apparently it doesn't. As it says the engine weighs 10 tons..That 15 bit must be a typo then..(would a 15 rated engine even work on a 50 ton hovertank?)
Edited by Lafeel (07/30/08 01:31 PM)
|
Dester
07/30/08 03:03 PM
216.57.96.1
|
It states specificly in the rules that if the weight for your engine is not 20% you must either accept that it weights 20% of the total hovercraft weight or increase the speed to make the engine weight a legal limit. This is not a new rule or an old rule that went away, this has always been and i believe always will be for hovercraft.
I believe you hit the nail on the head with the "game balance" issues for the rule Lafeel. Personally Hovercraft and VTOLs have other issues, namely the break points in "lift factors" that forces a 20 ton vehicle to have a higher engine rating then a 21 ton vehicle of the same speed. My personal opinion is that they should have made lift factors a formula instead of a strait range based on tonage.
Donkey, most of your designs have a very munchkin factor to them... so if bending rules to your favor makes you happy, do what you will. Just know that your designs and back stories for them will be mostly dismissed and ignored in the BT comunity. If that doesn't bother you, by all means keep doing what you want. If you want to be taken a little more seriously here and any other board you visit, you might want to cut down on the munch factor. This is in no way a flame or insult, just some friendly advice.
Dester
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 12:15 AM
99.203.108.45
|
If what your saying of "munchkin factor" is caring about people that are so anal about printed rules and not just having fun with a game. I guess I am being a munchkin. But since I really don't know what exactly you mean by "munchkin factor" I cant really be sure that that answer is right.
I do like a rule that the makers of Dungeons and Dragons put out. "If a rule or set of rules create a problem in your enjoying playing the game feel free to change it or out right ignore it."
As for the world that I have created in my posts. I could not care less if any one cared about it in the least. I am just having fun writing it. I might write a short story based on what I have gone with so far. But don't worry. I have no intention of ever posting it here or even giving a link of where it might be posted. None of you will ever be bothered with knowing of its existence if it is ever written in the first place.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 12:57 AM
157.157.83.10
|
That's all well and good when you are among friends, but when you are posting stuff with people that follow said rules, you should really have expected this sort of reaction. Or indeed a stronger one for that matter, because as reactions go, this one has, so far, been relatively weak. (some people do not take to people changing fundamental rules of the game well)
edit: also what you, conveniently, forgot to mention is that the dungeon master has the final say in such a matter, not the player, as it is he who ultimately sets the rules, and there is no real equalient of such a position in this game.
Edited by Lafeel (07/31/08 01:01 AM)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 01:35 PM
70.0.47.68
|
Quote:
edit: also what you, conveniently, forgot to mention is that the dungeon master has the final say in such a matter, not the player, as it is he who ultimately sets the rules, and there is no real equalient of such a position in this game.
??? Huh?... Most of the times that I have played BT there was a Game Master running the game. I would love to know how you run a RPG with out a GM.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 01:40 PM
157.157.83.10
|
That's just it. Battletech isn't a rpg, it's a table top wargame, like say Warhammer, or Flames of War.
Quite a big difference there.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 03:25 PM
70.0.47.68
|
Battletech is also a RPG and thats how I am used to playing it.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
07/31/08 05:37 PM
157.157.83.10
|
And are you, pray tell, a player or a GM?
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
07/31/08 05:47 PM
70.0.22.79
|
Before I became a OTR trucker I was both. Now I can't do anything other than post here some of the designs that I had came up with over the years.
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!!!
|
Fang
07/31/08 10:53 PM
75.181.136.63
|
Battletech is not an RPG. Mechwarrior is an RPG. Both are two different facets of the same game universe. One can play Battletech without a GM. just grab some minis (or cardboard cutouts, like I learned to play with back in the day), mapsheets, die, and friends and you can have a game of Battletech. Campaigns and such tend to lean more towards Mechwarrior, and thus the need for a GM, although not always.
One by one, the rabbits are stealing my sanity.....
Edited by Fang (07/31/08 10:53 PM)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
08/01/08 10:01 AM
70.6.213.25
|
Thank you for splitting hairs for me. Now I have to worry about my hair having split ends. LOL
I was using Battletech as a generic name. I should have been more specific using Mechwarrior.
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!!!
|
Dester
08/01/08 04:09 PM
216.57.96.1
|
The fact remains that people on the board here don't use your "house rules" and makes your design illegal and as such limits its value to the board comunity as a whole.
There are lots of things that I don't like with the game and when I play table top, we use some house rules for such situations and that is perfectly fine if you do the same with construction rules AT HOME. When you come to the board you need to adhear to published rules or at the very least put up a cavate that you used a house rule when designing your unit.
Dester
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
08/01/08 10:02 PM
68.26.156.30
|
Do you mean that someone might care about my vehicle designs? I never expected anyone to even think of using them let alone really using them in a game.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
08/01/08 10:06 PM
157.157.83.10
|
One would think that is a large part of posting them at all, that and having them criticised by others (hopefully helpfully)
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
08/01/08 10:26 PM
68.26.156.30
|
Battletech is a game about battlemechs. Most players never use vehicles in there games. So posting them is for the most part a waist of time. But as a OTR trucker. I have lots of time to do just that. You have no idea how boring being a OTR trucker is.
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!!!
|
Lafeel
08/01/08 10:39 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Since I have no idea what a OTR trucker is (apart from it probably involving some driving :P ) I really can not comment on that.
As for vehicles, I actually disagree. Vehicles have their uses, even in this game, it just is easier not to use them, for some people at least.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
08/01/08 10:45 PM
68.26.156.30
|
Over The Road aka long haul driving
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!!!
|
Lafeel
08/01/08 11:07 PM
157.157.83.10
|
Should try your hand at writing fluff (background) for your designs, then. That should be a better use of your time than just thinking up random ones. Plus, good fluff is what makes the difference between a good design and just "bleh, another with this this and that"
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
08/01/08 11:18 PM
68.26.156.30
|
I did people complained of it more than the vehicle or mech that i was posting. So I cut the fluff.
And the vehicles that I have posted I made up a lot of years ago. There not new designs to me. I have a folder full of vehicle and mech designs. Well a lot more vehicles than mechs. So far the only new design was the Sniper mech.
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!!!
|
Zandel_Corrin
11/20/08 09:40 PM
123.2.140.247
|
This rule you refer too is it new to the latest edition of BTech?
Cause it's not in the BMRR.
Galaxy Commander
Zandel Corrin
Night Dragon Clan
|
Cray
11/20/08 11:12 PM
97.97.243.184
|
Quote:
Battletech is a game about battlemechs. Most players never use vehicles in there games.
Vehicles seem fairly popular, actually, especially for anyone who plays a campaign. Have you run a poll on one of the high traffic BT forums to see what percentage of players use vehicles or are you just going by your personal experience?
I mean, going by personal experience, I used them in about 2 out of 3 pick-up games where your units were chosen by tonnage. My group always made them easy to use, typically allowing you to get 2 tons of vehicles per base ton allowed in the game.
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
11/21/08 01:08 AM
79.141.17.231
|
Quote:
Quote:
Battletech is a game about battlemechs. Most players never use vehicles in there games.
Vehicles seem fairly popular, actually, especially for anyone who plays a campaign. Have you run a poll on one of the high traffic BT forums to see what percentage of players use vehicles or are you just going by your personal experience?
I mean, going by personal experience, I used them in about 2 out of 3 pick-up games where your units were chosen by tonnage. My group always made them easy to use, typically allowing you to get 2 tons of vehicles per base ton allowed in the game.
But Cray you are forgetting that BT has one flaw...the more you have on the table to play with, the longer the game takes. Add to that players who have been around and know the game well enough, ends up with a very long and drawn out game as each side, plots and counter-plots their moves and goes for maximum fire points while keeping the return favor as low as possible.
Glad you have the time to play 2 to 3 BT games in a month or every couple of months and have the time to allow for extra units on the field...a lot of us don't.
I like vehicles, they should be king with the mechs being the rare ultra machines that turn the fighting or something like that...but as things are, for most vehicles are not worth worrying about.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
11/21/08 08:33 AM
147.160.136.10
|
Quote:
Glad you have the time to play 2 to 3 BT games in a month or every couple of months
I think you misread my post because it didn't say anything about how often I played.
Quote:
but as things are, for most vehicles are not worth worrying about.
Is that based on personal experience or have you run a poll on HMPro.com to that effect? (If so, got a link?)
With the power of the internet and the possibility of hundreds of players responding to a poll, we should be able to get a very good idea of how many BT players regularly use vehicles. Personal testimony from 3 players (me, you, His Most Royal) isn't a sufficient sampling.
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.
Edited by Cray (11/21/08 01:54 PM)
|
Christopher_Perkins
11/22/08 07:37 AM
76.104.32.151
|
BattleTech Master Rules Revised Edition
P.127 Vehicle Table
Minimum Engine Weight 20% of HoverCraft Tonnage
Classic BattleTech Tech Manual
(The Current BattleTech Construction Rules Book)
p.94
"however, hovercraft must tie up at least one-fifth of their total mass in engine
weight, which can restrict their weapon choices."
on p.101
"a 45-ton hovertank has a minimum engine weight of 9 tons (20 percent of 45 tons = 9 tons). If this vehicle then attempts to install an ICE engine that provides 6 Cruising MP, it can either accept that its 35-Rated ICE (Engine Rating 35: [45 tons x 6 Cruising MP] – 235 Suspension Factor = 35) weighs 9 tons rather than its customary 2-ton weight, or it can upgrade its speed until it finds a “legitimate” rating-to-weight ratio."
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
Edited by Christopher_Perkins (11/22/08 07:45 AM)
|
Christopher_Perkins
11/22/08 07:47 AM
76.104.32.151
|
Quote:
I did people complained of it more than the vehicle or mech that i was posting. So I cut the fluff.
Actually People Talked about the fluff
Did they ever comment on the Stats?
That should tell you which matters more to them.
Christopher Robin Perkins
It is my opinion that all statements should be questioned, digested, disected, tasted, and then either spit out or adopted... RHIP is not a god given shield
|
GundamMerc
04/28/09 10:05 AM
216.48.130.13
|
Personally I agree with His Most Royal on this one. Why shouldnt people post designs based on house rules? They arent causing any harm, and can actually give you ideas and inspirations in your own designs. What you guys seem to be doing is the same thing that happens on Wikipedia. You keep following the rules like hounds on a scent, even when it gets in the way of having fun.
|
Lefric
04/28/09 11:26 AM
216.120.184.66
|
Quote:
Personally I agree with His Most Royal on this one. Why shouldnt people post designs based on house rules? They arent causing any harm, and can actually give you ideas and inspirations in your own designs. What you guys seem to be doing is the same thing that happens on Wikipedia. You keep following the rules like hounds on a scent, even when it gets in the way of having fun.
Without equal rules, you have no basis for comparison, and no basis for discussion. To claim otherwise is perposterous.
Imagine if at 25 NBA arenas, the rim is at 10' high, but at 3 it is at 8' high, as these teams are all made up of guys under 6' 6". Further, at the last two, the teams have several good outside shooters, so the rim is 11 feet high, but the 3 point line is two feet closer.
See how "house rules" invalidate discussions? If the rules arn't the same for everyone, you can't discuss weather something is "fair" or not.
"We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence upon those who would do us harm." -George Orwell
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
04/28/09 01:15 PM
24.5.141.133
|
The thing is I am not braking the rule I just have a different interpretation of the rule.
I am saying if a ICE power plant can lift the hover craft and the power output is the same between ICE and fusion engine I can use a fusion power plant to replace the ICE engine even though the fusion engine does not technically follow the rule as others define the rule. for example if a hover craft can have a 100 ICE engine that they can also use a 100 fusion engine. Both engines create the same amount of power to lift the hover craft.
Why do hover craft have a engine weight restriction and VTOLs and hydrofoils do not?
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!!!
|
Prince_of_Darkness
04/29/09 09:14 PM
205.202.120.216
|
Game balance, pure and simple. With advanced tech like XL engines and Heavy Ferro-Fibrous armor, the speed of a hovercraft can become so high and the armor can become so thick that it is extremely hard to hit and kill. Now put an AC/20 onto that design- not so fun, eh  ?
|
Cray
04/29/09 09:45 PM
97.97.245.32
|
Quote:
Game balance, pure and simple. With advanced tech like XL engines and Heavy Ferro-Fibrous armor, the speed of a hovercraft can become so high and the armor can become so thick that it is extremely hard to hit and kill. Now put an AC/20 onto that design- not so fun, eh ?
Until it runs into something with a bunch of SRMs or an LB20X.
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.
|
Prince_of_Darkness
04/29/09 11:00 PM
205.202.120.216
|
Quote:
Quote:
Game balance, pure and simple. With advanced tech like XL engines and Heavy Ferro-Fibrous armor, the speed of a hovercraft can become so high and the armor can become so thick that it is extremely hard to hit and kill. Now put an AC/20 onto that design- not so fun, eh ?
Until it runs into something with a bunch of SRMs or an LB20X.
Yeah, but then again, what likes to run into a bunch of SRM's or an LB 20X ?
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
04/30/09 04:15 AM
24.5.141.133
|
Quote:
Game balance, pure and simple. With advanced tech like XL engines and Heavy Ferro-Fibrous armor, the speed of a hovercraft can become so high and the armor can become so thick that it is extremely hard to hit and kill. Now put an AC/20 onto that design- not so fun, eh ?
Basically doing that you defeat the cost savings of a vehicle. You might as well buy a battlemech. Because of the extra weight that vehicles must have with fusion engines there really is not that much in weight savings with XL engines. What you are really looking for with a fusion engine in a tank is in the use of lasers with the heat sinks that come with it and not needing power amps.
You seem to have forgotten that vehicles do have limits the the amount of armor that they can have.
If I wanted a AC20 in a vehicle I would not have a fusion engine in it. I would have a ICE engine. I would rather have the cost savings of the ICE than the very slight weight savings of the fusion engine or XL fusion engine would bring me.
I have the same reason that I don't like any kind of FF armor. It is not worth the extra cost.
After all this time you still don't understand me. Everything always comes down to the Cbill with me. Money IS power! The person that uses his money the best will almost always win.
I know that I will lose vehicles in combat. So I want to make sure that what I lose is not very expensive. I don't mind losing four .3m tanks if it means that I captured a 5m battlemech.
How about looking at it this way. Your .6billion Cbill regiment goes up against my vehicles that cost 40million each regiments . To have the same cost value of are armies, you're up ageist 15 to one odds. Yes I will take great losses if your full regiment is only fighting each one of mine separately. But in the end I will finely wear you down. If I could attack each one of your companies with a reinforced regiment of my vehicles my losses would be a great deal less to almost non existent.
I know you look at and think in terms of battle value. I look at BT in a more real life setting where Generals are concerned about getting the funding for there armies form the politicians. You know the real world where the more money the Generals need the more the politicians get tight fisted.
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!!!
|
GundamMerc
05/05/09 10:03 AM
216.48.130.13
|
Quote:
Quote:
Personally I agree with His Most Royal on this one. Why shouldnt people post designs based on house rules? They arent causing any harm, and can actually give you ideas and inspirations in your own designs. What you guys seem to be doing is the same thing that happens on Wikipedia. You keep following the rules like hounds on a scent, even when it gets in the way of having fun.
Without equal rules, you have no basis for comparison, and no basis for discussion. To claim otherwise is perposterous.
Imagine if at 25 NBA arenas, the rim is at 10' high, but at 3 it is at 8' high, as these teams are all made up of guys under 6' 6". Further, at the last two, the teams have several good outside shooters, so the rim is 11 feet high, but the 3 point line is two feet closer.
See how "house rules" invalidate discussions? If the rules arn't the same for everyone, you can't discuss weather something is "fair" or not.
I see youve never heard of baseball then. the only part of the field that is really regulated is the infield, the outfield wall and distance from home are very different at each stadium you go to.
|
Prince_of_Darkness
05/05/09 12:31 PM
205.202.120.216
|
Quote:
Quote:
Game balance, pure and simple. With advanced tech like XL engines and Heavy Ferro-Fibrous armor, the speed of a hovercraft can become so high and the armor can become so thick that it is extremely hard to hit and kill. Now put an AC/20 onto that design- not so fun, eh ?
Basically doing that you defeat the cost savings of a vehicle. You might as well buy a battlemech. Because of the extra weight that vehicles must have with fusion engines there really is not that much in weight savings with XL engines. What you are really looking for with a fusion engine in a tank is in the use of lasers with the heat sinks that come with it and not needing power amps.
Then why do you, in your vehicle designing process, put a fusion engine for power in them? IT does the exact same thing.
Quote:
You seem to have forgotten that vehicles do have limits the the amount of armor that they can have.
You seem to forget how Ferro Fibrous armors work. For the same amount in points I have lees weight put into it, equaling extra weight for weapons and equipment.
Quote:
If I wanted a AC20 in a vehicle I would not have a fusion engine in it. I would have a ICE engine. I would rather have the cost savings of the ICE than the very slight weight savings of the fusion engine or XL fusion engine would bring me.
To each his own, but remember that you don't want to turn your AC/20 tank into a Saladin.
Quote:
I have the same reason that I don't like any kind of FF armor. It is not worth the extra cost.
Why? Look at Heavy Ferro Fibrous- it gives 24% more armor than standard, meaning that putting it on any assault 'mech it will free up as much weight as endo steel. For 3 spaces on a vehicle, I think it's worth it.
Quote:
After all this time you still don't understand me. Everything always comes down to the Cbill with me. Money IS power! The person that uses his money the best will almost always win.
That's up to conjecture. If everything you field is cheap and low cost it is one thing, but what if you also didn't use that wisely? Take artillery- it's expensive, but extremely useful.
Quote:
I know that I will lose vehicles in combat. So I want to make sure that what I lose is not very expensive. I don't mind losing four .3m tanks if it means that I captured a 5m battlemech.
That's true, but how often does that occur? What if you lose a cheap Ontos tank, but in it's process salvage a more expensive Urbanmech? Seems like a Phyrric victory, eh?
Quote:
How about looking at it this way. Your .6billion Cbill regiment goes up against my vehicles that cost 40million each regiments . To have the same cost value of are armies, you're up ageist 15 to one odds. Yes I will take great losses if your full regiment is only fighting each one of mine separately. But in the end I will finely wear you down. If I could attack each one of your companies with a reinforced regiment of my vehicles my losses would be a great deal less to almost non existent.
WAT
Quote:
I know you look at and think in terms of battle value. I look at BT in a more real life setting where Generals are concerned about getting the funding for there armies form the politicians. You know the real world where the more money the Generals need the more the politicians get tight fisted.
You still are not making any sense. Do you have a source on your allegations?
|
Lefric
05/05/09 12:36 PM
216.120.184.66
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Personally I agree with His Most Royal on this one. Why shouldnt people post designs based on house rules? They arent causing any harm, and can actually give you ideas and inspirations in your own designs. What you guys seem to be doing is the same thing that happens on Wikipedia. You keep following the rules like hounds on a scent, even when it gets in the way of having fun.
Without equal rules, you have no basis for comparison, and no basis for discussion. To claim otherwise is perposterous.
Imagine if at 25 NBA arenas, the rim is at 10' high, but at 3 it is at 8' high, as these teams are all made up of guys under 6' 6". Further, at the last two, the teams have several good outside shooters, so the rim is 11 feet high, but the 3 point line is two feet closer.
See how "house rules" invalidate discussions? If the rules arn't the same for everyone, you can't discuss weather something is "fair" or not.
I see youve never heard of baseball then. the only part of the field that is really regulated is the infield, the outfield wall and distance from home are very different at each stadium you go to.
Invalid example. While you are correct that the distance to the outfield wall isn't identical in every ball park, the relevant point is that the distance between the bases is always 90'. What you are arguing is not the minor difference that is a few feet difference between the distance to outfield walls in ballparks. You are arguing that in Yankee statdium, the bases are 80' apart, while at Fenway park, they are 100 feet. Fundemental difference invalidates comparisons.
And before you use baseball as an example again, there are a great many people who say that different outfield dimensions invalidates baseball records for the very reason you are trying to use in a proof for your point. Again, ifferent rules make comparisons impossible.
And in something "technical" like a mech design, this is even far more true.
"We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence upon those who would do us harm." -George Orwell
Edited by Lefric (05/05/09 01:26 PM)
|
GundamMerc
05/07/09 11:36 AM
216.48.130.13
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Personally I agree with His Most Royal on this one. Why shouldnt people post designs based on house rules? They arent causing any harm, and can actually give you ideas and inspirations in your own designs. What you guys seem to be doing is the same thing that happens on Wikipedia. You keep following the rules like hounds on a scent, even when it gets in the way of having fun.
Without equal rules, you have no basis for comparison, and no basis for discussion. To claim otherwise is perposterous.
Imagine if at 25 NBA arenas, the rim is at 10' high, but at 3 it is at 8' high, as these teams are all made up of guys under 6' 6". Further, at the last two, the teams have several good outside shooters, so the rim is 11 feet high, but the 3 point line is two feet closer.
See how "house rules" invalidate discussions? If the rules arn't the same for everyone, you can't discuss weather something is "fair" or not.
I see youve never heard of baseball then. the only part of the field that is really regulated is the infield, the outfield wall and distance from home are very different at each stadium you go to.
Invalid example. While you are correct that the distance to the outfield wall isn't identical in every ball park, the relevant point is that the distance between the bases is always 90'. What you are arguing is not the minor difference that is a few feet difference between the distance to outfield walls in ballparks. You are arguing that in Yankee statdium, the bases are 80' apart, while at Fenway park, they are 100 feet. Fundemental difference invalidates comparisons.
And before you use baseball as an example again, there are a great many people who say that different outfield dimensions invalidates baseball records for the very reason you are trying to use in a proof for your point. Again, ifferent rules make comparisons impossible.
And in something "technical" like a mech design, this is even far more true.
um, i think you missed the part where i said the infield WAS regulated, also im not saying its wrong to have different dimensions. the outfield walls also tend to differ in height and material of construction.
and this is a valid comparison, as i am showing you can have a regulated sport with "home rules" aka the difference in the outfield distances and the like. now instead of bristling because someone likes to make up his own rules for home play (which he probably doesnt use if he is at a tournament, so the "its because of game balance" doesnt really apply), why dont you try to use constructive criticism, make your own units using traditional rules, and leave him the hell alone.
|
Lefric
05/07/09 02:42 PM
216.120.184.66
|
Quote:
Quote:
Invalid example. While you are correct that the distance to the outfield wall isn't identical in every ball park, the relevant point is that the distance between the bases is always 90'. What you are arguing is not the minor difference that is a few feet difference between the distance to outfield walls in ballparks. You are arguing that in Yankee statdium, the bases are 80' apart, while at Fenway park, they are 100 feet. Fundemental difference invalidates comparisons.
And before you use baseball as an example again, there are a great many people who say that different outfield dimensions invalidates baseball records for the very reason you are trying to use in a proof for your point. Again, ifferent rules make comparisons impossible.
And in something "technical" like a mech design, this is even far more true.
um, i think you missed the part where i said the infield WAS regulated, also im not saying its wrong to have different dimensions. the outfield walls also tend to differ in height and material of construction.
and this is a valid comparison, as i am showing you can have a regulated sport with "home rules" aka the difference in the outfield distances and the like. now instead of bristling because someone likes to make up his own rules for home play (which he probably doesnt use if he is at a tournament, so the "its because of game balance" doesnt really apply), why dont you try to use constructive criticism, make your own units using traditional rules, and leave him the hell alone.
1) Calm down. I'm trying to have a discussion, and you're telling me to shut up? 
2) Check out what I said. I specifcally said two things 1) My example is that baseball is the same in all but outfield distances, which invalidates your example, and 2) Many people claim baseball records are invalid for the very reason you are using it as an example. Thus, your example fails for two reasons.
3) If you think my criticisim wasn't constructive, perhaps you need to learn the definition of the term. I am encouraging "him" to make his comparisons valid by using a set of rules we all know, can play with, and trust to be valid. That is not negative in any way shape or form.
4) I will say this one more time: If the rules arn't the same, we can't compare them. I do not know his house rule, have never played with it, and therefore can't say if it's fair or balanced, or even a good rule. If he wants to design something using the normal rules, we can discsuss it. If not, he is no better than newtype's houseruls of "I can make a LAM with no gyro becuase of my RPG characters lifepath." A-hem? I rest my case.
"We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence upon those who would do us harm." -George Orwell
Edited by Lefric (05/07/09 02:45 PM)
|
Cray
05/07/09 03:19 PM
147.160.136.10
|
Oi, Gundam, lighten up a bit. Don't make me get all moderatory.
Lefric, home rules presented here have a time and place on the forums, too. That's how people present new equipment for review. If you feel you can't evaluate a design because of custom rules, you can say so, but a poster is entitled to use all the home rules he wants - so long as he stays within the posting rules, he can post what he wants.
And both of you, the baseball analogy is starting to turn into thread drift by becoming an argument of its own.
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.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
05/07/09 05:03 PM
24.5.141.133
|
Quote:
and this is a valid comparison, as i am showing you can have a regulated sport with "home rules" aka the difference in the outfield distances and the like. now instead of bristling because someone likes to make up his own rules for home play (which he probably doesnt use if he is at a tournament, so the "its because of game balance" doesnt really apply), why dont you try to use constructive criticism, make your own units using traditional rules, and leave him the hell alone.
I am not making a "NEW" rule I am interrupting a currant rule differently than others. My way can be tournament legal it would be up to the people that govern the rules for tournaments to decide if its legal or not. To which I doubt anyone on this list has sole say in the matter. I could enter my design into a tournament and get a ruling. If I disagree with the ruling I could challenge it with the higher ups after the tournament is over. At some point my interruption of the rule will be accepted or denied. It might even get all the way up to the governing board of BT tournaments because of the logic behind my interruption of the rule.
There is a proses of rule judging at any tournament. If one disagrees with the ruling it can be challenged to the ruling body after the tournament is over for future tournaments. It happens all the time with tournaments. Though it does happen for the most part the rule at the time stands for the current tournament.
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!!!
|
Zandel_Corrin
05/07/09 09:00 PM
123.2.140.247
|
While i'm also of the same opinion about the min engine weight reqs for hover vehicles....
I do believe that our interpretation of that rule has been put forth and denied at tournament lvl b4.
I remember reading something about it.... years ago now but from then on I decided to house rule it.... After all why go fusion if it still weighs the same and just makes your vehicle stupidly fast?
Galaxy Commander
Zandel Corrin
Night Dragon Clan
|
GundamMerc
05/08/09 11:39 AM
216.48.130.13
|
I must have forgotten my pills that day, as I was a bit over the hedge, so to speak. Sorry for the little outburst there (although I still am confused by what he is trying to say). I also sometimes get sidetracked into proving my point, so if i start doing that tell me.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
05/08/09 12:07 PM
24.5.141.133
|
Quote:
While i'm also of the same opinion about the min engine weight reqs for hover vehicles....
I do believe that our interpretation of that rule has been put forth and denied at tournament lvl b4.
I remember reading something about it.... years ago now but from then on I decided to house rule it.... After all why go fusion if it still weighs the same and just makes your vehicle stupidly fast?
I have said in the past it has nothing what so ever to do with speed. If speed was the concern I would use a bigger engine. It has everything to do with the 10 free heat sinks.
I still don't see why you have a burr up your flank about it. Since I will never play with you, why do you care what I do what so ever? You should have just ignored the entire thread instead of making a big deal about it. Is it drama for drama's sake?
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!!!
|
Tripod
05/24/09 03:51 AM
192.94.94.106
|
Umm...
Hate get off track on this thread but.... since when was a large pulse laser a LONG range weapon?
House rules are cool, I like designs of different rule interpretations, just be SURE you let everyone know you used a different interpretation of a rule in construction!
TBA
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
05/24/09 06:38 AM
24.5.141.133
|
Well this whole thing was well dragged out before. I would not have reopened this can of worms if I was not specifically asked by two people to show some of my concept designs. People like Cray and PoD knew exactly what to expect and still rehashed the old comments. I had said in the past, if you don't like them don't use them in the games that you play. No one is putting a gun to your head telling you you must use them.
Well, since I know that if I ever try to post any of my vehicle designs I will have to put up with this yet again. No matter how many people ask endlessly, I'm not going to post another vehicle. Its not worth the rehash.
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!!!
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
12/16/16 03:33 AM
70.122.160.150
|
After being gone for a good part of a year I decided to be a royal pain in the donkey by bringing up my old posts from the morgue and set loss some old post zombies. *Evil braying!!!*
I will see you again in another year or so
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!!!
|