Quote:

---

What is your favorite canon conventional vehicle and why?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What is your favorite canon conventional vehicle and why?

---

Mymidon. It's a great BT example of a main battle tank: durable, cheap, mobile, fuel-independent, well armed, and fits into a light vehicle bay.

---

Quote:

---

It took me a little time to find the tank do to you misspelled it.

---

Well, I pronounced it correctly (with the "r") in my head. What happened to your telepathy?

Fixed spelling.

Quote:

---

I agree it is a good design but it is a little costly at 1.4mil in my opinion. I like my tanks to be under .5mil.

---

Quote:

---

In Battletech conventional vehicles are cannon fodder to be thrown in mass at battlemechs so should be extremely cheap to replace.

---

Quote:

---

A planetary noble or merc had to keep in mind that his military unit's cost didn't begin and end at the purchase of his tank. There's gas, ammo, and support that greatly outweigh the initial purchase costs of a combat vehicle.

---

Quote:

---

Personally, My favorite Vehicle is the Alcorn XI MBT. A 95 ton slinger of death. Works extermely well as a fixed gun emplacement and as a hunter-killer.

---

Quote:

---

Personally, My favorite Vehicle is the Alacorn XI MBT. A 95 ton slinger of death. Works extermely well as a fixed gun emplacement and as a hunter-killer.

---

Quote:

---

I'll pay for the fusion engine and PPC for the following reasons:

1) With essentially no fuel needs, the Myrmidons an awesome expeditionary vehicle. ICE vehicles of the same engine rating use about 2 tons of fuel every few 8-hour maintenance cycles and BT military DropShips have **** for cargo capacity. A battalion of ICE tanks can drain a Mule's worth of fuel in a week. You can refill the hydrogen needs of a battalion of Myrmidons with one crewman's full bladder.

2) With essentially no fuel needs, its an awesome defensive and guerrilla vehicle. Invaders seize all your cities and military bases? No problem, the Mymidon keeps trucking for years.

3) With essentially no fuel needs, its awesome for training purposes. Instead of burning thousands or tens of thousands of CB in fuel for a day's training of a company, you don't pay much more than keeping the crew in barracks or pushing paper.

4) With an energy-based main gun, even if it is 300,000CB, you can shoot all day long. Want to melt a giant bridge, rip up kilometers of road, destroy an artificial harbor, bust the Hoover Dam, level a forest, flatten an entire city, or shatter square kilometers of spaceport tarmac? You can't do that with any non-nuclear, non-capital ballistic weapon. But you can in a few hours with a patient gunner, a fusion engine, and a PPC.

5) With an energy-based main gun, its an awesome expeditionary vehicle. BT military DropShips are starved for cargo space, such as for ammunition (and fuel, and armor, and other spare parts...)

6) With an energy-based main gun, its an awesome defensive/guerrilla vehicle. It can run for years without reloading.

7) With an energy-based main gun, its an awesome training vehicle. A single ton of LRMs (30,000CB) or SRMs (27,000CB) is equal to four times the average person's annual income, to say nothing of an underpaid vehicle crewman. Autocannon ammo ain't cheap, either. You can empty a ton of ammo of anything but an MG or SRM2 in about 3 minutes or less. A PPC or other energy weapon? You fire that for hours on end.

8) Fusion power is awesome for supporting units. The Myrmidon can recharge laser infantry's weaponry. It can produce hydrogen for DropShips, aerospace fighters, and fuel cell-powered support vehicles. It can light up a field encampment, power communication tents, and provide hot food. This might sound trivial, but the 10 largest fuel users in the US Army in Desert Storm included 2 combat vehicles (Abrams at #5 and Apache at #10), 7 support vehicles, and field kitchen food heaters (#9). And even though the Abrams was at #5, cutting its fuel use by 50% would've shortened build-up time for Desert Storm by a month because all those support vehicles were there for the combatants.

Yeah, I'll pay extra for the fusion and energy main gun. The tank is more expensive, but I save buckets on the rest of the military (so many fewer support units!) and I get enormous gains strategically. Want to reinforce your 'Mechs on a raid? Fusion tanks mean you don't have to worry about fueling them, energy means you don't have to worry about keeping them armed. Worried about a serious invasion? Don't worry, your tanks can keep fighting long after their bases and cities are overrun. Crew skill? You can keep your tanks on the training fields all-year long, none of that namby-pamby simulator crap. Support vehicles? You get to cut out droves of them.

---

Quote:

---

My 10 cents worth, why with all of the advancements have we not seen lighter engines for conventional vehicles, I am not talking about fuel cell types or any of those, I am talking about the IC engines that 90% of all conventional vehicles use. We should see them lighter then what BT claims, so what is the official reasoning against this or was this like a a cupola and the pintal mount for a AP weapon weighing in at a several tons when in fact these two don't weigh that much and the pintal is nothing more then a fitting to hold the MG for the Tank Commander or Gunner to fire it and move it around the cupola, funny how TPBT managed to screw up that.

---