Need rules on Monitor Spacecraft

Pages: 1
Karagin
09/28/19 05:19 PM
72.176.171.47

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Which rule set has the rules for monitors?
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
FrabbyModerator
09/29/19 05:38 PM
91.39.164.192

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
There are no official rules.
Gerald Hall once published something in the MechForce magazine ('Mech Quarterly) and Rick Raisley of Heavy Metal Pro then included these construction rules as optional rules in the HMPro program suite.

Herb Beas, as Line Developer, explicitly ruled against Monitors as a viable concept so these construction rules are non-canonical Fanon now.

See wiki article on Monitors.
Karagin
09/29/19 07:22 PM
72.176.171.47

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Interesting...
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Requiem
10/04/19 03:39 AM
1.158.185.137

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Reclassify –

Monitor’s are illegal …..

However, for example, the WOB “Caspar Drones” are not

Suggest looking at the Liberation of Terra Books with regards to all the Drones etc. and hey presto you now have a legal “Monitor / Drone”
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
Karagin
10/04/19 11:53 AM
72.176.171.47

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Reclassify –

Monitor’s are illegal …..

However, for example, the WOB “Caspar Drones” are not

Suggest looking at the Liberation of Terra Books with regards to all the Drones etc. and hey presto you now have a legal “Monitor / Drone”



Thanks however, I didn't ask if they were legal or illegal, I asked which book had the rules.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Requiem
10/04/19 06:49 PM
1.158.185.137

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Can you reverse engineer the drones to establish a set of construction rules?
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
Karagin
10/04/19 07:53 PM
72.176.171.47

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Don't need new rules, the existing ones via the older publication of the one time in house magazine work for what I need.

Also if I want I can rip out the KF of any existing warship and call it a monitor for the simple sake it's not able to jump anymore. Viola instant system defense vessel.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
FrabbyModerator
10/05/19 02:56 AM
91.39.164.192

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
In the absence of official construction rules we still have Herb's LD ruling that I understood to mean that the drive core also happens to be the spine of the ship, in a technical/engineering sense. If you rip it out (or design a vessel without one) you still need to replace it with an alternate structure, leaving only little of its mass free for other systems. You cannot simply replace its mass with guns and armor and have no core structure on your Monitor.

The WoB corvette Sheridan (from "The Last Full Measure") had its drive core removed but apparently only gained some extra living space for it.
ghostrider
10/05/19 04:20 PM
66.74.60.165

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It might be an idea to see about defense stations design. They are mobile gun emplacements, but with a monitor, or system defense warship, the engines would have to be larger.
So there has to be a way to make a non jumping system defense ship that is larger then a behemoth dropship.

But then having a real system defense force goes back to the 'not landing forces, means no stompy mechs fighting each other'.
Yet I would think in the next few years, the developers will come up with some bs, like they did with the whole WOB invasion, where things that are illegal, will be used, as there is no real logical way the threat could get so large.

And a question about the jump drive structure.
I thought the drive was so delicate, that it had to have heavy structures to hold the ship away from the drive as well as keep the drive in place. I really don't see why there would be an issue.
And to design a warship without a drive, would not cause an issue, as it would be built from the ground up. So all bracing and such would be there before the outer hull is placed.
I would think the center of the ship would be a great place to put the fusion engines and part of the thrusters. The jump core wouldn't be there, so you would have space for larger engines and power distribution. Even making a flight bay, with the fighters coming out the middle would work.
Conflicts in the up/down concepts of the crew being the main issue with this. Though fuel tanks would work. Pick up tubes in the middle of the tank would negate part of the zero-g issues there.
Karagin
10/05/19 06:02 PM
72.176.171.47

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
In the absence of official construction rules we still have Herb's LD ruling that I understood to mean that the drive core also happens to be the spine of the ship, in a technical/engineering sense. If you rip it out (or design a vessel without one) you still need to replace it with an alternate structure, leaving only little of its mass free for other systems. You cannot simply replace its mass with guns and armor and have no core structure on your Monitor.

The WoB corvette Sheridan (from "The Last Full Measure") had its drive core removed but apparently only gained some extra living space for it.



I can do anything I want, nothing said I was following canon now did it? I asked where the rules could be found, you told. Our interesting party member felt the need to jump and offer his ideas, I responded with an idea of what I am looking to do. No engine, means no jumping, which would mean the ship would be either lighter or modified to take into account the drive being gone. Never suggested or said anything that would mean removing core structure, you jumped to that conclusion with anything offered from me on the matter.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Pages: 1
Extra information
0 registered and 16 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: 4087


Contact Admins Sarna.net