Cray
03/05/02 03:51 PM
204.245.128.3
|
>The rules in AT2 are written from a fighter stand point, thus it is clear that the warships are taking a back seat to the fighters.
How do you figure they're written from a fighter stand point?
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Cray
03/05/02 03:52 PM
204.245.128.3
|
And you wonder why people "attack" you all the time.
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
03/05/02 03:53 PM
63.173.170.110
|
A sequal...yes...right, but that normally means it keeps the same name and get's a 2 put behind it or 3 or what ever not a renaming.
BS needs a major overhaul, and comparing AT2 to BS shows that BS is going out the window....but this is taking away from the discussion as stated in the main thread so let's go back on to the topic please.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/05/02 03:54 PM
63.173.170.110
|
Ok...telling him that it's nice that he saw them is wrong? Right ok will keep that in mind...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/05/02 03:55 PM
204.245.128.3
|
So, basically you don't have any evidence that AT2 is written from a fighter's standpoint and are falling back on "let's get back to the main topic[1]"?
[1] Which I do at length elsewhere further in the thread.
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
03/05/02 03:56 PM
63.173.170.110
|
Let's see 80% of the book covers how fighters work in the game and in battle, I don't see much in the book covering warships PLUS I don't even see the stats for the warships anywhere in there.
I can see that you don't agree with this and so seeing how we are going in circles may I suggest we either drop it or go back to the main topic instead?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
03/05/02 03:57 PM
204.245.128.3
|
Sarcastic replies like "that's nice" are wrong, yes. Even if you were actually thanking him, you could've chosen more appropriate words, like something involving "thank you."
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
03/05/02 03:58 PM
63.173.170.110
|
No sorry, I have the evidence as given in the book since it deals with fighters and their role in game. YOU don't want to see this or will not take it as proof, so as to avoid an endless arguement with you over this I am asking we go back to the topic and let this go.
So it's up to you...I am done on this part of the discussion.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/05/02 03:59 PM
63.173.170.110
|
Thank you I will file that input away for future use, now moving back to the orignial topic...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
03/05/02 04:08 PM
134.121.157.14
|
They're simply too massive. Consider the density of a kilometer-long Warship that masses 800,000 metric tons.
But you said *I* wanted Warships, and as a matter of fact I don't. It is therefore in my best interests to apply my mental abilities to proving their utter worthlessness.
-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.
:)
|
Nightward
03/05/02 04:15 PM
132.234.1.13
|
I think that the sales theory is about right.
But in answer to the other question, I think WarShips are great. It's the way that they are used that is ineffectual. As I discussed with Bob on CBT, the power of a WarShip is not its physical presence (although that is good, too) but the *THREAT* of having a WarShip. If you lob up to a planet, demand its surrender, and give them the ultrimation 'or we smash one major city each hour from orbit', enemy forces will come to heel very quickly. As long as you don't carry out the treat (although smacking down an unihabited mountain range or two just to prove intent wouldn't hurt) you are covered by the Ares Conventions.
The next bit I discuss relies a bit of Terry Pratchett. In 'The 5th Elephant', they talk about the Marquis of Fantailler Rules- a code for boxing. This code mostly consisted ofg a listr of places people weren't allowed to hit him, and was regarded as a great work. Given that the Ares Conventions were cooked up by a Liao...well, I'm sure you're all bright enough to pick the similarities.
WarShips are expensive, yes, but if they were handled by a half-decent commander (shall we say, someone like Aral Vorkosigan from Lois McMaster Bujold's series) they would be the ultimate weapon. Idiot commanders will loose and look stupid no matter what forces they are given.
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
|
Bob_Richter
03/05/02 04:15 PM
134.121.157.14
|
As a matter of fact, the rules were simplified ("dumbed down"?) specifically to make it easier to play Warships.
Let's face it: a fighter game with the same complexity and Battletech would be perfectly okay. A WARSHIP game on that level would be....um....well let's just say I don't enjoy rolling dice THAT much.
-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
03/05/02 04:22 PM
134.121.157.14
|
As I've told you before, you become the laughing stock of the galaxy when the defenders say "Unh uh" and you can't carry out your threat. Which could very well happen a lot, no matter HOW many mountain ranges you smash.
Warships are also intensely vulnerable, and far too expensive to justify for the minimal gain they provide.
-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.
:)
|
Nightward
03/05/02 04:27 PM
132.234.1.13
|
Karagin, quit being so damned aggressive. The easiest way to prove you are right is not to say 'I'm right, I'm right, and I won't listen to your arguments', but to supply supporting evidence. A la:
There are several points the support the idsea that AT2 was written mainly to deal with Fighters. First off, most of the book is given over to integrating Fighters with a BattleTech game; more material in that book deals with Fighter combat than any other naval type (eg DropShip or WarShip.). Secondly, the rules dealing with Fighters are much more detailed, logical, and well-written than any of the others, which leave large gaps between 'reality' and the rules. Finally, they included stats on every fighter type in existence in the back of the book, as well as heaps of counters for them. No WarShips, or DropShips appeared, and the rules of AT2 in fact made several existing vessels illegal.
This shows that either they believe most players are not interested in WarShip or DropShip combat and want to play with AeroSpace fighters, or that in the future FanPro/FASA/Wiz Kidz will discontinue support for other naval vehicles.
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
|
Nightward
03/05/02 04:34 PM
132.234.1.13
|
Maybe. But if I were a planetary government official, I would not like to take the chance that the person with whom I'm dealing would not carry out their threat. If you said 'no' and the planet was bombarded...you would have the blood of thousands, if not millions, upon your hands.
As I mentioned on CBT, the value of a WarShip lies not in the physical domain, but in the realm of projected power.
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
|
Bob_Richter
03/05/02 04:41 PM
134.121.157.14
|
presenting evidence leaves you vulnerable to reasonable counter-arguments.
>>>First off, most of the book is given over to integrating Fighters with a BattleTech game; more material in
that book deals with Fighter combat than any other naval type (eg DropShip or WarShip.).<<<
Actually, most of the matierial deals with all craft generally, and the simplification of the rules makes fighter craft intensely less interesting or detailed than they were in Aerotech.
>>>Secondly,
the rules dealing with Fighters are much more detailed, logical, and well-written than any of the
others, which leave large gaps between 'reality' and the rules.<<<
I beg to differ. NONE of the rules in AT2 are detailed, logical, or well-written to any meaningful degree. 
>>>Finally, they included stats on every
fighter type in existence in the back of the book, as well as heaps of counters for them. No WarShips,
or DropShips appeared, and the rules of AT2 in fact made several existing vessels illegal. <<<
On the other hand, fighter stats underwent the most significant changes, and all Warship and Dropship types were grandfathered in under the conversions section.
-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.
:)
|
Nightward
03/05/02 04:44 PM
132.234.1.13
|
"I beg to differ. NONE of the rules in AT2 are detailed, logical, or well-written to any meaningful degree."
Got it in one. I bought the book so I could use WaRShips (muhahahaha) and was royally dismayed by the ungodly mess the rules were in. I could have done a better job.
The conversion tables were hideos. I obtained a copy of TR: 2750 and had a go; I gave up very quickly.
But Fighters are the "'Mechs" of AT2. Everything else is written to be poor by conbtrast-including WarShips, which should be the ultimate.
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
|
Bob_Richter
03/05/02 04:48 PM
134.121.157.14
|
So you surrender.
How does the Warship enforce your surrender?
Answer: It can't.
So it's a good old-fashioned Battlemech fight after all, since you don't really think your military commander (who was dispatched by the central government and couldn't frankly care less about your little cities) is going to give up that easily, do you?
-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
03/05/02 04:54 PM
134.121.157.14
|
>>>But Fighters are the "'Mechs" of AT2. Everything else is written to be poor by conbtrast-including
WarShips, which should be the ultimate. <<<
There you go looking at this from the wrong perspective again.
Warships SHOULDN'T be the ultimate. They should be big, flashy, impressive, posessed of massive firepower, but should be ABSOLUTELY vulnerable to attacks by fighters.
Actually, I was most annoyed by the loss of the "boarding actions" rules.
Battlespace was REALLY Aerotech 2. It just took the wrong course in oversimplifying fighters, reducing them to squadrons and stars. That always annoyed me. Made them the infantry of space, when they're supposed to be the ultimate determiners of aerospace superiority.
And so we have Aerotech 2 (Aerotech 3) which went the right direction, but not far enough.
-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.
:)
|
Cray
03/05/02 05:10 PM
12.78.128.202
|
Now there you go. That's an argument I can listen to.
I disagree, though, and think the only reason warships might be phased out is due to the post-AT2 decision to do this Dark Age Clicktech thing.
Simplification of warship rules in AT2 would be just to make them more playable, even if it didn't please some players (*cough*Bob*cough*).
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Cray
03/05/02 05:14 PM
12.78.128.202
|
Hmm. A kilometer-long warship with a length-to-beam ratio of 10:1 that is also 800,000 tons...it's density is about 20% of the density of modern ocean-going warships.
Clearly, the tonnage needs to go WAY up, or the dimensions need to be approximately halved.
I like that. Halve the dimensions.
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.
|
Bob_Richter
03/05/02 05:15 PM
134.121.157.14
|
I don't mind Warship rules being simplified, it's the simplification of the FIGHTER rules that bugs me.
-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.
:)
|
Cray
03/05/02 05:17 PM
12.78.128.202
|
>They should be big, flashy, impressive, posessed of massive firepower, but should be ABSOLUTELY vulnerable to attacks by fighters.
No point to them then, not even for carrier or bombardment duties. Even surface warships today aren't "absolutely" vulnerable to fighters. In fact, they can be quite threatening to fighters.
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.
|
Bob_Richter
03/05/02 05:20 PM
134.121.157.14
|
>>>In fact, they can be quite threatening to fighters. <<<
I didn't say they weren't, just that the fighters were threatening (deadly, in fact) to them.
-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.
:)
|
Cray
03/05/02 05:22 PM
12.78.128.202
|
Oooohhh....
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.
|
Bob_Richter
03/05/02 05:33 PM
134.121.157.14
|
depending on its exact dimensions, of course. I just figured the density for a 1000m/100m/100m rectangular object massing 800,000 metric tons...it came to .08 gram/cubic centimeter.
I must have mis-figured it the last time I calculated it. Odd how that happens some times. Get thinking about Battlespace on a late night, forget to cube your conversion factors, and there ya are...
...but I still don't like the idea of ships (or guns) that big. It's too much of a leap for me.
(especially when the guns do so little damage, but can't do any more, or even that much, for game balance reasons)
I mean...we have 100 ton 'Mechs (perhaps a 50% increase over modern tanks) and 2.5 million ton warships (Over a 1000% increase over modern surface warships.)
-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.
:)
|
Nightward
03/05/02 06:06 PM
132.234.1.13
|
Civilians.
One word that says it all. If the planetary government surrenders and the WarShip sends in ground forces to accept the surrender, which are then attacked, the WarShip in orbit has the ability to strike at the cities. By and large, the MIliatary are patriotic, so getting their civilians killed will not be on the top of their 'to do' list.
Whoever holds the WarShip holds all the cards, simpy because of the fact that they can initiate a slaughter without fear of retaliation.
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
|
Nightward
03/05/02 06:09 PM
132.234.1.13
|
Yeah, the other reason I bought AT2 was because of Michael Ryan and company. I was really hoping to have the rules for those, but they weren't in there.
Nobody is going to agree 100% on any set of rules; I would have liked to see more attention to WarShips and DropShips, because of their massive firepower. *GUNS!*
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
|
Nightward
03/05/02 06:13 PM
132.234.1.13
|
The only limit to the size of a WarShip is budget. If I wanted to build a 4.5 trillion ton WarShip, it could be done. Not under the rules, but it is feasable. Unfortunately, I then have to pay for it, something that would bankrupt even the Diamond Sharks.
The 2.5 million ton cap is just there for the sake of sanity and playibility. A 4.5 trillion tonner would just be a mess. Youl'd need more dice than exist on this planet just for its Point Defence batteries...
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
|
Nightward
03/05/02 06:30 PM
132.234.1.13
|
We discussed this on CBT, too. You do not have to blockade an entire system, only the Jump Points. A couple of Ships over the Nadir and Zenith points, and a few in orbit will do the trikc. And even if they get through the blockade, they still have to get out...
Yea, verily. Let it be known far and wide that Nightward loathes MW: DA. Indeed, it is with the BURNING ANIMUS OF A THOUSAND SUNS that he doth rage against it with.
|