Zhukov Heavy Tank(Fusion)

Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)
Retry
03/08/14 12:11 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
This one was a simple one to upgrade. The AC10s were turned to LB 10-Xs, the SRM was downgraded, and I partially adressed it's lack of longer ranged firepower with an ERLL.

----

Zhukov Heavy Tank Fusion
IS TW non-box set
75 tons
BV: 1,175
Cost: 4,634,000 C-bills
Source: Succession Wars

Movement: 3/5 (Tracked)
Engine: 225

Internal: 40
Armor: 197 (Ferro-Fibrous)
Internal Armor
Front 8 50
Right 8 36
Left 8 36
Rear 8 24
Turret 8 51

Weapons Loc Heat
SRM 4 FR 3
LB 10-X AC TU 2
LB 10-X AC TU 2
ER Large Laser TU 12

Ammo Loc Shots
SRM 4 Ammo BD 25
LB 10-X AC Ammo BD 10
LB 10-X Cluster Ammo BD 10

Equipment Loc
CASE BD
Karagin
03/08/14 07:51 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Drop the ER and the wasted 2 tons that you (again) paid for in heat sinks and upgrade the SRM to either a SRM6 or a Streak 4 and some MGs or two SPLs.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 07:54 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
That wouldn't do it much good.
Karagin
03/08/14 07:57 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It would 10 times better or good for it then ER Large Laser and the extra two heat sinks that you are paying for by losing two tons, of which the 7 tons can be put to better use then an ER Large Laser.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 08:02 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Removing the laser reduces it's LR firepower by about a third. SRMs aren't exactly long ranged.
Karagin
03/08/14 08:03 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
You could drop it down to a standard Large Laser and then use the extra two tons not spent on the heat sinks on AMS or something like that which could keep the vehicle alive longer.

Having the long range fire power isn't always the needed thing, some defensive firepower can be the difference between one more round of fighting.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 08:04 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The ERLL range brackets makes the LL range brackets cry.
Karagin
03/08/14 08:05 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
And your point? IT's not needed, the cost you pay for it one on a vehicle is not worth it.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 08:09 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
7 tons for the very helpful weapon system.
Karagin
03/08/14 08:11 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It is a wasted 7 tons that doesn't give you anything that going with a Large Laser and again using the 2 tons for something else would not give you more help in. Or maybe dropping the SRM down to a SRM2 and going with a standard PPC would be even more useful for the tank, granted you have the minimum range issue with the PPC, but if things have gotten that close then the tank is dead anyways.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 08:14 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Min range(+range brackets) is precisely why I did not use the PPC.

The normal LL does not give either the range or the accuracy of the ERLL.
Karagin
03/08/14 08:18 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
What accuracy of the ERLL? It doesn't have anything going for it that the standard Large Laser doesn't have. You gain for 4 extra heat for 4 hexes of range...yeah not seeing that as anything major, since you don't gain any extra damage and the over all weapon system cost you 7 tons when used on a vehicle compared the normal 5 tons if you went with the LL.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 08:21 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
7/14/19, it has better to-hit numbers than the regular LL at 6 and 7, and 11-14.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
03/08/14 08:21 PM
206.29.182.244

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I would ditch the Extended Range Large Laser for a standard PPC.

Yes the standard PPC does not exactly have range as the ERLL but it does do two more points of damage. I would say that would be a better investment of the 7 tons.
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!!!
Retry
03/08/14 08:23 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
And a minimum range. This way, the Zhukov is capable at both urban and open combat.

Plus the standard PPC has range brackets that are more exploitable than the ERLL.
Karagin
03/08/14 08:24 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Min/Maxing there Retry. We are trying to tell you that the ER LL is not worth using on a vehicle due to the cost of the extra heat sinks needed. It's just not worth it.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 08:27 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
2 extra heat sinks.

2 tons total.

The weapon costs about the same as a PPC on a vehicle if you only use 1.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
03/08/14 08:29 PM
206.29.182.244

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Min range of 3. If they are at range of 2 you have a +1 and at range 1 you have a +2. Big @#$% deal!

Its still a better choice because of the extra 2 points of damage.
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!!!
Retry
03/08/14 08:30 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Incorrect, at range of 3 you have a +1, at range 2 +2, range 3 +3.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
03/08/14 08:37 PM
206.29.182.244

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I remembered it incorrectly.

Its still not worth &@#^ caring about 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!!!
Karagin
03/08/14 08:37 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The total is 7 tons Retry since you have to pay the weight of the ER LL as well as the heat sinks. Which means you could put a PPC in it's place which is a better use of the 2 tons lost to the weight of two extra heat sinks.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 08:42 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
At a range of 1 it's almost like trying to shoot something at LR.

And as I said, 7 tons for the very helpful weapon system.
KamikazeJohnson
03/08/14 08:46 PM
38.108.87.20

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Karagin writes:

The total is 7 tons Retry since you have to pay the weight of the ER LL as well as the heat sinks. Which means you could put a PPC in it's place which is a better use of the 2 tons lost to the weight of two extra heat sinks.



It's an interesting trade-off. I'm leaning in favour of a PPC because of the necessity of spending the 2 extra tons. I rarely use the ERLL because of the high Heat/Dmg ratio...never really looked at the range brackets before. IfDHS were allowed, I'd probably go with the ERLL
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
Retry
03/08/14 08:48 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
ERLL range brackets-7/14/19
PPC range brackets-6/12/18 with a min of 3.

The PPC just isn't useful enough for urban combat, and has a slightly shorter reach in the open(And with extreme range rules, a moderately shorter reach)
Karagin
03/08/14 08:49 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I wish they would allow vehicles to use DHS, since they allow warships and dropships and aerospace fighters to use them...
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 08:49 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
If vehicles could use DHS, they'd be more capable combatants than mechs.
Karagin
03/08/14 08:50 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
And the trade off of the extra heat for range with NOTHING gained in damage isn't not worth the extra weight of the heat sinks. PPC would be far better given that you could put the now gained two tons to other uses like AMS or MGs or more armor etc...
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
03/08/14 08:51 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
No Retry they would be equal with mechs, having DHS doesn't change their weaknesses at all.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
03/08/14 08:53 PM
76.7.238.202

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I use vehicles all the time effectively, and I can definitively say that vees would eat mechs alive if they had DHS.

You wouldn't gain ANY tonnage with the PPC. Try your math again; 5 tons for the ERLL +2 for the heat sinks is the same tonnage as the 7 ton PPC with no spare heat sinks.
Karagin
03/08/14 08:58 PM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
If you say so Retry, I guess you don't follow the official damage chart with the parts about how the LIMITED facings take more damage then the many facings mechs have thus cause a section loss faster for vehicles or the fact that the to hit table has the extra side effects of killing movement or locking turrets or other fun things for vehicles. But if you say you use them effectively I guess against an AI based system that is a good thing.

Very true Retry you don't gain anything. And you don't lose anything either. Lots can be done with the 2 tons, since you don't want to use the PPC, then go with an Large Laser and use the extra two tons for something else or better still use the light PPC, you could, need to double check it, get two of them for the same weight/heat sink issue and still have a ton left for something else.

Really what we are saying is that you are better off using something else over the ER Lg. Laser.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)
Extra information
0 registered and 44 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: 14488


Contact Admins Sarna.net