wartang
12/20/03 03:57 PM
209.201.75.43
|
now im not talking quads i mean 6, 8, 10,12 legged mechs are there any rules for and record sheets
and can they weigh more than 100 tons?
Im trying to recreate the starwars episode 2 the battle of geinosis
i love this game
|
Silenced_Sonix
12/20/03 04:34 PM
168.209.97.34
|
Nope - if you do something like that, it'll have to be completely custom.
BTW, if you can pull it off, send me a copy - I'm also a fan. And if you need help, just ask (but please be specific)
Evolve or Die
|
wartang
12/20/03 11:08 PM
209.201.75.1
|
1) can they carry more weight?
2)what would be the benifits of them?( other than incerased weight allotment, if allowed)
as for the record sheet i think i have an idea
i love this game
|
tgsofgc
12/20/03 11:35 PM
67.4.198.207
|
Quote:
1) can they carry more weight?
I'd say no, after all quads don't. Though you should do whatever you need for your scenario.
Quote:
2)what would be the benifits of them?( other than incerased weight allotment, if allowed)
Well they have redundant systems, namely a Biped is basically disabled after loosing a leg, a quad after 2, well these up that further. This could make them quite durable.
Larger piloting skill bonuses to remain standing, if a quad is more stable than a bi, a 6 legger is even more then right? I'd say a +1 bonus for each 2 legs beyond biped, quads = +1, 6 leggers = +2, 8 leggers = +3, etc.
I have ideas how to do this to a certain extent, but I too would be curious about how you handle the hit location rolls, etc.
I find that 'pinpoint' accuracy during a bombing run increases proportionally with the amount of munitions used.
-Commander Nathaniel Klepper,
Avanti's Angels, 3058
|
Silenced_Sonix
12/21/03 08:59 AM
168.209.97.34
|
Same as for super-heavy and Naval units:
Front
Front Left
Front Right
Back Left
Back Right
Back
After rolling to determine where you hit from the top table, you then roll again for each location to get a more specific hit eg (for 6-leggers)
Front - CT
- LT
- RT
- Left front leg
- right front
- Head
Left Front - CT
- LT
- Left front leg
- left middle leg
- left back
- head
Left Back - CT
- LT (R)
- left back leg
- left middle leg
- left front leg
- head
Etc, you figure the rest out. Word of advice: don't go beyond eight legs - could get very, very nasty.
Evolve or Die
|
tgsofgc
12/21/03 11:50 PM
67.4.198.245
|
Woldn't this make the mechs practically unkillable as they have "padding" around their center torsos?
I find that 'pinpoint' accuracy during a bombing run increases proportionally with the amount of munitions used.
-Commander Nathaniel Klepper,
Avanti's Angels, 3058
|
Vicen_Korel
12/22/03 12:42 PM
66.38.6.40
|
not at all, after all the damage will work into the torso so just target specific your shots. even if it does, the mech won't have that many spots to put equipment on with anyways. I would say anything with more than four legs would have to have a cordination unit in the torso. if this unit takes a hit then movement is decreased by 1 or something like that.
"Nothing sends your love like an ER PPC"
--Vicen Korel
|
wartang
12/23/03 02:07 AM
209.201.75.50
|
you know thinking about this i just might uses a super heavey tank instead or create my own record sheet
i love this game
|
wartang
12/29/03 01:19 PM
209.201.75.20
|
how do yuo post a picture 
i love this game
Edited by wartang (12/29/03 01:43 PM)
|
Ignorant_Savage
12/31/03 05:05 AM
24.197.176.136
|
intresting idea. here's my take on it:
pros
well... you could probably make them more than 100 tons. it's simple logic on that point; the more legs you have, the more weight you can support on top of them.
also, i'd think that the more legs you had, the more stable the mech would be. i think that someone in this thread mentioned that you could have a couple blown off without the machine falling over. i can also imagine that it would be more stable in difficult terrain, e.g. probably wouldn't suffer penalties for small level changes, going through rough terrain, etc.
cons
first off, good luck trying to find an engine that big. even with lv3 'large' engine rules, the engine is going to take up a helluva lot of space.
secondly, i'd imagine that you'd either have to have a larger engine, or some type of special motive system depending on how many legs you had.
and last, i would assume that just 'casue the thing has more legs dosen't necissarly mean it's gonna move faster. i think that multiple legs would get in the way of each other to some extent, slowing the overall/top speed of the 'mech.
"Those who trade away essential freedoms for a little saftey deserve neither freedom or saftey."
- Benjamin Franklin
|
Diablo
12/31/03 11:31 AM
24.114.50.190
|
as for your engine problem, why not use two or three smaller engines instead of one big one. since this mech would be larger than normal anyways, the weight shouldn't be a problem. and 6 crits for an engine is no bigger than some auto-cannons. although, these mech would soon become large, semi-moble weapons platfors by the end of this thread. although, that would be kinda cool. I've been trying to make 200+ ton mechs work in my mind for a while and this multi legged idea seems to make it work. it would become a crawler support mech.
|
wartang
03/07/04 09:39 AM
209.201.75.43
|
[IMG]http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/wartang/six_leg_crit_sheet.bmp[/IMG]
<img src=http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/wartang/six_leg_crit_sheet.bmp>
http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/wartang/six_leg_crit_sheet.bmp
i dont know witch one will work so i posted all three but this is what i came up with.
i love this game
|
Paladin
03/10/04 09:26 PM
64.7.134.28
|
tgsofgc is right. All a six-legger would do is add to the number of "extra" hit locations to help divert damage from the torso. That, and add stability (for Piloting rolls). I don't know where you all are getting the idea that multi-legged 'mechs could carry more equipment. Quads don't, the maximum weight for a quad-mech is still 100 tons. Mind you, that may just be a practical thing; try finding a large enough fusion engine for a 100+ ton 'mech. A 'mech weighing 150 tons would need a 300 to be able to run 3! Any faster requires a 450 (which doesn't even exist)! And Diablo? Using multiple smaller engines would be HIGHLY unbalanced within the game rules. As an example, substituting two 200 engines for a 400 engine is lighter by 35.5 tons!
Edited by Paladin (03/10/04 09:29 PM)
|
Diablo
03/11/04 10:11 AM
66.207.113.110
|
it would balance, it essentialy like using an XL engine, it's lighter but it also has more crits to hit, thus shortening it's battlefield life. also, heat build up can increase more rapidly as the engine crits add up. suddenly destorying one engine kills half the power on a mech and renders it besicaly in low power mode since it cannot draw upon enough power to move and shoot and the like.
|
tgsofgc
03/12/04 04:40 PM
67.4.193.215
|
Believe me it is extremely hard to balance the weight gain... basically the only way you can is through cost, BV, or a limitation on critical spaces. I have tried like many battletec players in the past, unfortunately I am not wholely satisfied with my own attempts and believe you me it cost alot of crits in my system.
I find that 'pinpoint' accuracy during a bombing run increases proportionally with the amount of munitions used.
-Commander Nathaniel Klepper,
Avanti's Angels, 3058
|