Retry
03/30/14 03:17 PM
76.7.236.208
|
Redesigned the normal Bulldog Fuel Cell Engine variant, it resembles the original Bulldog better than the canon one, IMO.
----
Bulldog Medium Tank FCE II
IS advanced
60 tons
BV: 895
Cost: 2,608,800 C-bills
Movement: 4/6 (Tracked)
Engine: 240 Fuel Cell
Internal: 30
Armor: 161 (Ferro-Fibrous)
Internal Armor
Front 6 40
Right 6 32
Left 6 32
Rear 6 23
Turret 6 34
Weapons Loc Heat
SRM 4 TU 3
SRM 4 TU 3
Small X-Pulse Laser FR 3
LB 10-X AC TU 2
Ammo Loc Shots
SRM 4 Ammo BD 25
SRM 4 Ammo BD 25
LB 10-X AC Ammo BD 10
LB 10-X Cluster Ammo BD 10
Equipment Loc
Targeting Computer BD
Armored Chassis BD
|
Karagin
03/30/14 03:26 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Where are the heat sinks?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 03:29 PM
76.7.236.208
|
They're included in the total weight.
|
ghostrider
03/30/14 03:52 PM
66.27.181.1
|
this is one of the few things I liked the large laser on. The 10x does give it a little more options it could use.
Would think an mg with half ton ammo would be better then the xpulse.
Why add in an energy weapon, when you pulled the main one out?
|
Retry
03/30/14 04:03 PM
76.7.236.208
|
Fuel Cells have 1 free heat sink, It lets one smaller energy weapon be feasibly put on the chassis, such as the SXPL, for enhanced anti-infantry performance
(-3 vs. infantry targets at much better range brackets than MGs can be a serious lifesaver against higher tier conventional infantry)
|
Karagin
03/30/14 05:57 PM
70.118.139.48
|
So one free heat sink and the XSPL does three...so where are the other two heat sinks? Again what ever program you are using is not showing us everything and thus is incorrect.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 06:03 PM
76.7.236.208
|
The other two heat sinks are already considered in the weight of the design, along with the power amps. It doesn't need to be shown because it's already calculated in the design.
Unless you want to calculate the tonnage yourself and prove it wrong.
|
Karagin
03/30/14 06:29 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Actually it does need to be shown Retry, other wise the design is not showing everything and lends to some one saying it's illegal to use. Again I suggest getting your self a better design program like the official from Rick aka Heavy Metal Pro Series or one of the free ones out there. Those ALL show the correct weights, correct items and do so in a manner that doesn't leave on wondering what is going on.
So where are the two extra heat sinks showing? Oh wait they are not, nor is the the free single heat sink either. So this design is not correct since the program has omitted items needed to show the users what all is there.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 06:35 PM
76.7.236.208
|
If you can't indirectly infer what is there or not from the game rules, it's not of my concern.
Now are you going to prove it an illegal design or not?
|
Karagin
03/30/14 06:51 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Read the construction rules Retry, the heat sinks need to be listed, since vehicles have to have enough heat sinks to fire all energy weapons. That is well known common knowledge. It is illegal in that it is NOT listing the heat sinks.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 07:04 PM
76.7.236.208
|
The heat sinks are on the design regardless of whether or not they're listed.
|
Karagin
03/30/14 07:27 PM
70.118.139.48
|
If they are not listed, then they are not there. Hence the part about the program you are using being faulty. You are posting incomplete data.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 07:32 PM
76.7.236.208
|
They are not listed yet they are there. They aren't separate crit slots or any crap like that that actually affects the vee in-game.
|
Karagin
03/30/14 07:38 PM
70.118.139.48
|
They do affect the vehicle in the game, if they are not there, and yes the sheets do show them, then the vehicle can fire the energy weapons if they are not shown then it can't fire the weapons.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 07:41 PM
76.7.236.208
|
They are there.
|
KamikazeJohnson
03/30/14 08:21 PM
50.72.218.68
|
Quote:
Karagin writes:
So one free heat sink and the XSPL does three...so where are the other two heat sinks? Again what ever program you are using is not showing us everything and thus is incorrect.
The original post lists the SXPL at 3 tons, which would be the total of the weapon and the required Heat Sinks.
SXPL: 1 ton
Required Heat Sinks: 3 tons
Integral Heat Sink: -1 ton
Total: 3 tons.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
|
Karagin
03/30/14 08:24 PM
70.118.139.48
|
I get that part, but the rules call for the heat sinks to be shown, thus Retry's design is not following the rules in listing the heat sinks so that they can be seen and shown.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 08:26 PM
76.7.236.208
|
It's an outline.
|
Karagin
03/30/14 08:28 PM
70.118.139.48
|
SO are the states the other programs post, YET those all show the heat sinks, so why is your design program special and not showing it?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 08:33 PM
76.7.236.208
|
I don't know why it doesn't show such limitedly useful trivia.
Either go through your own designer and plug numbers in to PROVE it can't be a valid design or "go home", so to speak.
|
Karagin
03/30/14 08:34 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Trivia? Glad to know something that is mandated by the rules is trivia to you.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 08:37 PM
76.7.236.208
|
Heat sinks are mandatory for vehicles, and it should be assumed whatever heat sinks that are needed are there.
|
Karagin
03/30/14 08:40 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Yes they are mandatory and your stats are not showing them.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 08:43 PM
76.7.236.208
|
They're not shown because it's inferred to be calculated within the final tonnage.
|
Karagin
03/30/14 08:46 PM
70.118.139.48
|
They are shown on the Record sheets, thus should be in the stats.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 08:55 PM
76.7.236.208
|
They are in the stats, just not the posted ones because they don't get exported on for whatever reason.
|
Karagin
03/30/14 09:01 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Then contact MegaMek and have them correct it.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/30/14 09:04 PM
76.7.236.208
|
I'm not going to contact them because *you* have an issue with it.
|
ghostrider
03/31/14 02:26 AM
66.27.181.1
|
as you said it yourself, do not infer they are there or not there.
All components needed to use a vehicle should be listed. It is possible that someone didn't insert the correct information in the matrix used.
For all we know it does not require control components.
For a while I have seen the x-pulse laser. What is the difference between a normal pulse laser and the x pulse?
And retry, this is a good reason for people to not trust specific programs. Without all the information, I could put up a design that does not have anything needed to make it run. Just say the program doesn't show it.
But when I use it people ask how did this or that happen.
Oh. It wasn't listed before you agreed to let me use it.
|
Retry
03/31/14 07:38 PM
76.7.236.208
|
I'd like to know, Karagin, which rulebook, page number, etc. that says that any internet forum outline of a vehicle must have the heat sinks on a vehicle design specifically listed.
|
Karagin
03/31/14 10:35 PM
70.118.139.48
|
There is not internet rule, it is common sense since the rule say components like controls, amphiliphers and heat sinks etc...are required and are part of the construction. Leaving them out and assuming folks will figure it out is wrong.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/31/14 11:04 PM
76.7.236.208
|
Assuming I should change my design program, even though this works perfectly well for it's intended purposes, just so my posts will have a bit more pleasing format to you is no more correct.
|
Karagin
03/31/14 11:09 PM
70.118.139.48
|
So you are saying then Retry that posting correct information that includes all of the components as stated in the constructions rules is not something you would be bothered with and is not worth your time or effort to follow the rules as written in the core rule books?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/31/14 11:22 PM
76.7.236.208
|
Nice spinning there.
The information posted is correct, it is a valid design, and all this could have been found by calculating the givens(Such as every heat sink not free by the engine weighs 1 ton.)
The one time you tried to prove me wrong it was you yourself who messed up the design. (A turreted ML... You've never used manticores.)
|
Karagin
03/31/14 11:25 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Nice spinning your self, you won't admit you have posted incomplete information and keep going back to how your stuff is correct even though it's laid out in a format that makes it hard to read thus allowing someone to miss things. And again you avoid answering the question, but I am sure you will be making mention of this when you complain again about my comments.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/31/14 11:35 PM
76.7.236.208
|
I didn't omit any information that couldn't have been easily found with some simple inferences. Entering the information yourself(CORRECTLY) would reveal the unit is perfectly valid. All the rules are followed except perhaps the omitting of some givens. Which isn't much of a problem, because since they are givens, you can calculate whatever you want from those givens.
|
Karagin
03/31/14 11:49 PM
70.118.139.48
|
The information should be there to start with, all of the rest of us include such things when we post designs, so why can't you do the same, thus preventing anyone from questions the validity of your designs?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
03/31/14 11:50 PM
76.7.236.208
|
It could be, but it isn't, and it won't be. Deal with it.
|
ghostrider
04/01/14 01:28 AM
66.27.181.1
|
actually retry, your use of 2 different ecm systems that the rules said could not be used with each other, but then skirted the rules by saying it did not say they could not be on the same unit because they are not activated at the same it is an issue. I could very well say my tank has an energy weapon but no heat sinks and no amps on an ice but since I don't use it means it is legal.
All information should be listed to avoid issues. The fact that you didn't even list the turret starts off as a bad listing.
The listing should have everything there so you can see at a glance what is going on. Having to search thru all the lines to see if it has case, and if the crit was used in an innersphere unit is a good example.
But alot of this comes down to the fact that your free use of clan tech on innersphere things clouds peoples judgement on which is being used.
I don't have a system to plug in things, so figuring out weither you used a clan targetting computer or an innersphere one makes me wonder. same with the cannon. Did the program skip something important like leave out the control weight so an extra half ton was used elsewhere?
The original mechwarrior character book had the enforcer (pg 115) with 3 tons for the internal structure instead of 5. Without the full stats, most people would assume that mech had 2 tons of things it could have put on it. If not for using things like that to confirm how to build units, it would have put a bad light on the construction or the bad fact checking of the time.
|
Retry
04/01/14 05:00 PM
72.214.204.166
|
The rules don't say two ECM suites make a design illegal.
"Units with multiple ECM suites (of any type) may use only one at a time in game play. Fighters, Small Craft, DropShips and other airborne units may only use ECM suites when interacting with ground units, or in accordance with the advanced rules for aerospace combat covered in Strategic Operations. "
Tac ops 279
The rules state this just as they state that vees need heat sinks. The situations are nothing in common.
And the turret is shown clearly
And where are you getting the extra random half ton from?
|
ghostrider
04/01/14 06:56 PM
66.27.181.1
|
The term game play.
Does that mean for the round, or the entire combat scenario?
Could I use a different one next round?
Do they clarify this?
As for the fractal statement, it was directed to Karagin when he was putting the laser into the turret.
|
Retry
04/01/14 06:58 PM
76.7.236.208
|
I believe they mean "one per round" when they say in game play, but that's my interpretation. It may be clarified in an errata, but I wouldn't know.
|
Cray
04/01/14 07:00 PM
71.47.122.85
|
Quote:
Karagin writes:
but I am sure you will be making mention of this when you complain again about my comments.
Retry didn't make a complaint about your comments. Opening Sarna to have to read through every one of 120 posts in a tweet war is enough, no user complaints necessary.
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.
|
ghostrider
04/01/14 07:10 PM
66.27.181.1
|
most of the things they have for scenario game play seems to last the entire encounter.
Though air units only being able to use ecm on ground units makes that useless in air combat.
The turret is not listed as to the weight of the turret itself. Did you use partial tons or stick with the .5 increments?
other weights are questioned as well. Innerspher or clan?
|
Retry
04/01/14 07:18 PM
76.7.236.208
|
The program I use doesn't have fractional accounting if that's what you mean.
As for tech base, that's one of the first things listed.(In this case, IS Advanced, IIRC Lv3 Tech)
|
Karagin
04/01/14 10:21 PM
70.118.139.48
|
Quote:
Cray writes:
Quote:
Karagin writes:
but I am sure you will be making mention of this when you complain again about my comments.
Retry didn't make a complaint about your comments. Opening Sarna to have to read through every one of 120 posts in a tweet war is enough, no user complaints necessary.
Glad you comment Cray, I sent you a PM on the matter.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
04/02/14 12:53 AM
66.27.181.1
|
yeah. cray has been lenient for both sides of that one.
doesn't mean it will stop, but oh well.
The forum is a little boring when you log in 12 hours later and not a single post.
|