Requiem
03/04/21 10:05 PM
1.158.229.22
|
Looking at the argo my 2nd gen verion of the bluewater Submersible Carrier would look like the following ....
Citadel Class Special-Forces Submersible Vessel
(Multirole – Special-Forces Submersible Citadel – Fire Support Platform, Aerospace / BattleMech Carrier, Special Forces Infantry)
Mass: 30,000 tons; Power Plant: Fusion with 100 Double Heat Sinks;
Armament: 6 Arrow IV (with land-to-land and land-to-air missile variant – can be fired at a maximum depth of fifteen meters); 10 Ultra A/C 5 (with Anti-Aircraft Fire Control System with Radar (predicts required elevation & bearing based upon predicted movement.); 12 ERPPC; 12 Naval Anti-Missile –Gatling-Guns (with advanced Fire Control Systems).
Crew: 24 Officers, 116 Ratings, 8 Surgical Teams + Nurses, 30 Special Forces Infantry (One Platoon)
Cargo: 24 Fighter Bays (aerospace fighters, VTOLs or LAMs) – 1 Door (Bow); 12 Battlemechs with detachable submersible propulsion rigs – 2 Doors each (Port and Starboard), 5,000 tons standard Cargo – 1 Door (Stern)
Roles:
All weapons are maintained within a turret retractable weapons systems – half to port and starboard;
Fire-support capability – six Arrow IV systems with submarine-launched missiles (either land-to-land or land-to-air missile systems – maximum depth fifteen meters – conducting bombardment or anti-aircraft (including drop-ships when in range),
The Arrow IVs cannot be used whist in the process of launching / recovering.
An Advanced Fire Control System is used to control the ships arsenal.
Aerospace Carrier - Flight deck with retractable elevators to the hanger storage decks – carries twenty-four craft (aerospace fighters, VTOLs or Lams or a mix there of depending upon mission requirements) which can take off and land via the Flight deck.
BattleMech Carrier – Hanger storage deck contains twelve BattleMechs with detachable submersible propulsion rigs (whist underwater) – ingress / egress are via four Mech-sized Airlocks (2 on either side of the ship) – purpose – special BattleMech forces deployment from the sea to attack land based targets – Special Operations.
Special Forces Infantry – One platoon of infantry – divers or Zodiac Special Forces Boats – Special Operations.
MASH Unit – eight operating theatres complete with operating and nursing staff.
Additional features include:
Propelling the Citadel to a flank speed of 54Km/h is a 2,632.5 ton Fusion Engine, which also gives the submarine an unlimited range., together with eight massive batteries.
For protection the submarine boasts 100 tons of armour spread evenly around its hull and thirty life boats in case of emergency.
Twenty tons of communication equipment – three, three-dimensional operations planning boards for planning / discussing strategic operations – retractable maritime buoy (Via communications cable) enabling regular communications and via satellites (to ensure they do not surface whilst enemy warship is in orbit – orbital bombardment).
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.
|
Requiem
03/05/21 02:06 AM
1.158.229.22
|
Ok …. Consider the game …. Your company Mech Unit + commando unit + air unit has just recently been assigned to the citadel . Whist the ship was conducting a deep sea voyage a rival faction invaded, and in a massive blitzkrieg conquered the world.
Your ship comes to the surface only to discover the world you are on has been conquered ….
Now, as a partisan force your ship decides to strike back …..
And, if most of the world is water with hundreds of islands etc would make for an interesting game …..
OR/
Whist a planetary invasion is underway you unit has been assigned to a special commando unit utilizing the new citadel as your forward base. Striking the enemy in the rear along the cost …..
I am sure others could come up with some suggestions for utilizing such a vessel in the game ….
So any other suggestions and what era / war / battle of note would you have the ship deployed in ?
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.
|
ghostrider
03/05/21 02:58 AM
66.74.60.165
|
Before saying: Looking at the argo my 2nd gen verion of the bluewater Submersible Carrier would look like the following, there needs to be a few stats or clarifications done before bringing up the rest of the information.
The only Argo I know of is a dropship from the HBS game. As nothing here says this is a dropship, the question of how it is moved to worlds comes to mind. No diving equipment is listed, nor is there anything about burn days if a dropship. Nothing to even begin to suggest this is an actual working item.
As a side note, this should be in the design area.
As a vessel that tends to be in the water, torpedo tubes would be a good idea, as PPCs underwater don't go that far, even ER versions.
The Arrow artillery would have to use house rules, that I know of, as they don't work underwater, even if firing directly to the surface. Normal subs do have missiles that do work, so the issue isn't they can't be done, but rules violation.
With this, there should be something saying the Aerofighters can not launch or land unless there is some sort of area that is above water. Last I known, fighters that go into the water are destroyed as they sink.
The MASH unit detaches from the ship? Or is it just a medical bay with those items?
So some context is needed.
And not sure if you know, but the FS did have dropships they used for underwater CIC.
|
Requiem
03/05/21 03:14 AM
1.158.229.22
|
Please refer to the following
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Argo_Submersible_Carrier
As it is built on world and is NOT a drop ship.
Yes I am using my house rules that completely go against cannon rules for Arrow IV - ground-to-ground, air-to-ground and air-to-air ..... as for torpedo tubes - superflous - how many invasion fleets bring blue water ships with them capapble of hunting a sub? So, you would need to capture one (on world) and even then you would need to get close enough - and how many manufacture depth charges or even how to use them? where I could just stand off, rise to 15m and fire acouple of Arrow IV at the incoming ship or send in fighters / VTOL or LAMS to kill it with missles (Inferno would be a good choice)
Quote:
fighters that go into the water are destroyed as they sink.
and fighters that land on an carrier?
MASH unit is within the ship ....
Quote:
the FS did have dropships they used for underwater CIC.
problem is they are NOT built for underwater pressure as a submarine is - then ther is the issue of speed underwater - good luck in getting any dropship to a decent speed.
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
03/05/21 10:18 AM
70.118.172.64
|
Shouldn't this be in the Design section of the forums?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
03/05/21 12:14 PM
66.74.60.165
|
How many mechs have gone underwater in order to attack targets, or even sneak up on beachside bases?
How many subs are brought to worlds that have underwater bases or even other subs in their waters to be rid of them?
And since the game does not really like using subs, depth charges are not part of the game, so house rules are needed here as well.
Another issue with the game is that only a few locations can be sited in for just firing, so unless you have a TAG with the right missiles, targeting locations, you have some issues with the surface/fire/dive routine.
The fighter issue comes as the ship would remain underwater to avoid detection/normal surface return fire. Without stating having to have the fighter area above water, it sounds like the fighters can be launched and land underwater, much like the puddle jumpers in Star Gate Atlantis did.
When the FS used such ships, they were meant to remain hidden, so firing shots from them didn't happen until found. Hence, the need for speed wasn't a problem.
So adding in the disclaimer of needing house rules to deal with those things the game rules don't, would be a good way to make sure all know that they weren't pulled from thin air.
|
Requiem
03/05/21 04:12 PM
1.158.229.22
|
Quote:
How many mechs have gone underwater in order to attack targets, or even sneak up on beachside bases?
If the terrain allows and the tactics are sound – all of them.
Why have a section within the Battletech Manual – Movement in Water – why do the Clans have Harjel within their Mechs? “to operate underwater without fearing a hull breach, as long as armor is still present.”
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/HarJel
and then the Movement Cost Table – Water – Depth 1 – Depth 2
Quote:
How many subs are brought to worlds that have underwater bases or even other subs in their waters to be rid of them?
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Argo_Submersible_Carrier
Under the heading Notable ships – The Kraken Unleashed Mercenary Unit was able to do so ….
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Triton_Missile_Submarine
Draconis Combine –Triton’s were commissioned on other worlds
Keep investigating and there are more, go to
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Manufacturing_Timeline
then use the CTRL F function and put in sub and there are 17 entries ……
Quote:
And since the game does not really like using subs, depth charges are not part of the game, so house rules are needed here as well.
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Epsilon_Regiment_(Wolf%27s_Dragoons)
Several Steiner pilots were able to drop their depth charges, killing Colonel Jones and halting Epsilon's advance
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Category:Sub-Capital_Weapons
Why create a subsection of weapons specifically for subs?
Quote:
you have some issues with the surface/fire/dive routine
Home rules or use indirect artillery fire rules – in my opinion no real issue.
Quote:
the ship would remain underwater to avoid detection/normal surface return fire
No …. What is the range of a fighter? They can be launched from distance and return to new pre-designated point for recovery based upon ship movement or even the use of a simple homing beacon . so again the ship can recover craft above water then once recovered slip once more beneath the waves …..
There are many examples of this – Pearl Harbor – Midway ……
It is then up to each game master to make a call as long as everyone understands any ‘house rules’ then there should not be a problem ….
Subs have a place in the game so why not use them to their absolute ability in order to maximise the fun in the game?
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.
|
ghostrider
03/05/21 08:46 PM
66.74.60.165
|
So you agree that the torpedo idea has merit as the enemy DOES have a few ways to hit the waterborne vessel, given the return examples of mechs and subs being used to do that very thing.
Now as for sub capital weapons, I do hope you realize the link you have goes to spaceborne warship weapons that are smaller then the normal ones, not ones meant to be fitted on a submarine. Though give the room of this one, it may be possible to mount some on the ship.
IDF rules are not set for a launcher to be covered by water. Not even an inch. The water would fill tube artillery and possibly cause missiles not designed for underwater launches to go off course before they even clear the water, on up to detonating.
I have not seen anything in the weapons category that deals with depth charges, and the fluff has been known to add in things that are not canon. As a depth charge should be in the rules, as it can be used like the assassin used to destroy the crater cobras dropship once it got into the lesser air pressure, the reverse should be in the game as well.
Surfacing to fire leaves you open to return fire. Granted, the enemy would have to know you are there and waiting for you, it is still an issue. Not sure how fast you can deploy and fire artillery when you have hatches and even lifting/retracting a weapons position, so there is some gray area there.
Moving the ship to a new position to recover fighters should ALWAYS be done when sending out a mission. For mobile bases anyways. That is unless you dominate the ability to prevent a strike upon it.
As a side note, the ability to find units deployed to attack the vessel is where things have issues. How do you know the enemy has units in range of firing on your ships. Given underwater bases, if you are the attacker, it is very possible that the enemy has turrets for their torpedo launchers hidden in the bottom of the water body, or anywhere there is some sort of land mass, such as an underwater cliff. The enemy could also use such features to hide their approach to your position as well. Not as likely, but there is still the risk.
|
ghostrider
03/06/21 12:25 PM
66.74.60.165
|
It needs to be pointed out that the use of double sinks in this build is illegal, as this is a vehicle, even though a very large vehicle. So if you have plans to put this all down on a data sheet, this needs to be addressed. And to use doubles in this as a house rule, should mean that should extend to all vehicles and buildings.
I don't believe the AMS system would work underwater, which may have issues as well as if you do use depth charges, this could be a factor in sinking the sub as well.
Come to think of it, does ams work against torpedoes? I wouldn't think so. Not sure if they state this in newer rule books.
The range of a fighter varies greatly. Just flying to and from a point is much further then any sort of combat, and even going faster then cruise speed changes the distance. This also does not include if any extra weight is added, such as bombs. I am going to assume you mean in atmosphere, and not going from the planet to say a moon or intercepting incoming fighters and returning.
Which does bring up the idea that normal shuttles could be used from this, though not sure the conversion rate of a shuttle size compared to a fighter. This could well be a good thing in order to keep forces around a world supplied, and build an underwater supply depot that this unit is the only one that knows it is there. So there is a bonus to the scenario for you.
|
Cray
03/06/21 01:17 PM
71.47.193.139
|
Quote:
Shouldn't this be in the Design section of the forums?
Yep.
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
03/06/21 01:19 PM
71.47.193.139
|
Got any stats to go with this, like tonnage of the engine, internal structure, support vehicle tech level, etc.
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.
|
Requiem
03/08/21 03:59 AM
1.158.229.22
|
Sorry,
This is an NPC for my upcoming game where I wanted a little feedback.
My Dragon Empire (former DC) and the (former Outworlds Alliance) now the Arcadian Republic (ultra greenies / French / English – who’s technology is on par and in some areas far superior to that of the Terran Hegemony - hence the reason the Dragons are assisting) are going to get into a proxy war with the remaining members of the Star League ….
What is going to occur is North / South cold war scenario where the IS breaks into three factions – Star League / the Dragon’s Alliance and those who attempt to remain independent ….
My overall aim is to rewrite every House / Periphery state over time …..
Plus this game will have a massive number of House rules … such as BAP / ECM ranges are now in maps not hexes each with a rating value so that whomever has the maximum number on the field wins out …. Plus with XL engines, micronization is considered when it comes to engineering so that the size is halved …. Also weapons system evolve over time so that a second generation Laser decrease weight by 0.5 increase range by 1 and every 3rd, 5th etc generation minus heat by 1 (though I have put in limits as to how low the weight can go) plus many …. many more
Also all vehicles are getting a complete overhaul – for example all my Arcadian dropships look like Avenger with Battlestar Galactica single / double / triple flight decks with elevators and catapults …. Thus on world they are in effect mobile aerospace aerodrome …..
Plus my infantry are now far more dangerous ….
Thus my Home rules are made in an attempt to make it more fun (from my group’s perspective) ….. as I am on the whole moving away from the Canon History into my own universe ….
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.
|
Cray
03/08/21 09:01 PM
71.47.151.234
|
Quote:
Thus my Home rules are made in an attempt to make it more fun (from my group’s perspective) ….. as I am on the whole moving away from the Canon History into my own universe ….
House rules or not, it's hard to review a design without stats. The forum users are used to looking over numbers to see how you've used available rules and equipment to determine if the design is good or not.
That said, when house rules include equipment significantly better than canon then you tend to get negative feedback. 30 years after their introduction, the Clans are viewed as "munchkin" for improvements that are modest compared to what you're proposing for size reductions. For all the handwaving trying to explain the slow technological improvement trends in canon, ultimately the driver is game play. Sharp improvements that invalidate all prior technology are usually poorly received.
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
03/08/21 09:35 PM
66.74.60.165
|
The armored suits made infantry far more dangerous, and like a few things, people complained that they were too difficult to take out with conventional means.
The concept of no heat from Robotech style games comes to mind when you really start messing with heat/weight/power on weapons and such.
Yes, the game needs to have something come up that isn't status quo. The introduction of warships was one such thing. It was too powerful for the standard game. But yet, anything less, meant this huge war machine would die far to easily. The idea of why bother comes to mind.
On the flip side, some of the other weapons that did come out, weren't that impressive. The idea of slapping to lasers that used the same targeting like the Blazer should have been available for more then just 2 lasers. And entire arm, like the Blackhawk or Nova should have allowed such a feat.
But as asked for, stats are the biggest thing to showing what a unit can do. ECM that covers maps just doesn't work well as it creates the issue that NO one can do much, as you can only blind target things. ECM covers non land line transmissions. And it creates the issues of a warship as well. If you don't have it, and the enemy does, you are severely screwed. Once a stationary target is found, then you have to rebuild elsewhere, as the enemy knows exactly where to target. Without it, you just waste ammo until you do find it. This has always been the issue with ultimate items.
Just dropping some super advanced item and saying you are changing things to fit your ideas, will get a lot of negative feedback. You might as well say you can jump out of hyperspace in orbit and transport your forces down with mater/energy conversion equipment, ie star treks transporters.
Honestly, thinking about that one, why bother with your forces? Just transport a nuke or something and wipe out the enemy base with no risk of loss.
|
Karagin
03/09/21 10:34 AM
70.118.172.64
|
No stats means we can't say hey this would work or really tell us what it can do and compare it to similar vehicles or mechs etc...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
03/09/21 12:52 PM
66.74.60.165
|
There are no stats on the wiki on units such as armor placement and such. So just taking the concept without anything to back it up seems to be what was done here.
To start with, the unit would be a multi hex vehicle, which would cause issues to begin with.
Which needs to have the question asked, if this is even possible in the game. The super heavy units can NOT get this big, and as a multi hex unit, would be more likely an installation facility. This unit is 30,000 tons. Larger then more then a few dropships.
Granted, they may have changed this part of the rules, as I am still stuck in the stone age.
I would think carrier would suggest air/space craft, so removing some of the other things like the mechs, would be a step in the right direction. I was going to say infantry as well, but they can be the commando/marines that naval vessels tend to keep for boarding and away missions.
But it comes down to the house rules making this version the issue. Changing the engine weight, really stops the concept cold compared to the original in the wiki. Pretty much letting an Atlas walk at 6 sort of problems.
Not that I don't think the units in Battletech are fast. They aren't really. They need some extra speed, while being able to actually target things at a greater range.
But trying to fit this into a game without updating everything else is like sending the SDF1 into world war 1.
I could understand if it was using next gen tech from a world of higher tech, but this should be done with a different game mechanic. GURPS might be a better platform.
|
Karagin
03/09/21 03:36 PM
70.118.172.64
|
So we are talking about a large target that is going to move super slow and easily negated by factors like terrain, weather, FASCAM, vibrabombs, etc...so pretty much the SDS ground-based systems that are more show and tell than really a fighting force in the scale of the game?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Requiem
03/09/21 05:49 PM
1.158.229.22
|
What we are talking about is a Very large Tanker 300,000 long tons that cam move at 33 knots (twice the speed of a normal tanker) underwater ( it is not even at the Ultra Large Carrier state 320,000-550,000).
Terrain will only be factor if you come in close to the shore line or if there are underwater mountain ranges you would need to navigate.
Weather is also not a problem as you are underwater.
As for FASCAM – how many enemy forces are going to bring a ship with them in a Drop-ship – rebuild it then send in out and even then you will need to hunt it down – or capturing ships on world – and how many houses even make an underwater FASCAM weapon system and will transport it? Then there in the question of Depth how deep can they go before exploding to that of the ship’s crash depth?
Also vibrabombs are land based so …?
As for the Space Defense System this is why I put in a system to identify its location prior to breaching the surface - also how many Houses actually have this type of system?
As for being multi hexed – not a problem consider how many vehicles are mult hexed to begin with starting with Dropships – trains – artillery Long tom (six vehicles) etc
Quote:
I would think carrier would suggest air/space craft, so removing some of the other things like the mechs, would be a step in the right direction.
We are the dreamers and we can make it however we want – rules should not constrain the dream of engineering – engineering should be free to incorporate new R&D into it to improve the system and creating an under-water fortress creates a unique system …. and after all this is Science fiction !!!!
Quote:
Changing the engine weight, really stops the concept cold compared to the original in the wiki. Pretty much letting an Atlas walk at 6 sort of problems.
Question how do you put a 2,632.5 ton fusion engine into an Atlas?
Quote:
But trying to fit this into a game without updating everything else is like sending the SDF1 into world war 1.
Not so – we are in an era far more advanced …. Aircraft carrier / submarines were first starting to be built in the 1920s.
Consider the Southern Cross Vehicle – submarine carrier as an example …. in all reality is you can build spaceships and dropships the concept of building a submarine really should not pose an issue at all !!!!
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.
|
ghostrider
03/09/21 06:10 PM
66.74.60.165
|
Plus with XL engines, micronization is considered when it comes to engineering so that the size is halved
So this statement doesn't suggest that you further reduced the engine size/weight?
The idea of having vibromines underwater does sound a little off, but underwater mines isn't. As the pressure of water does change during storms and such, the vibromine concept does seem out of place.
There are special rules in place for dropships, and trains are not really one solid unit, but a mixture of cars that are connected together. The long tom mobile system is odd, but not really sure if it is above 30 meters in length. I know the picture in TRO 3025 makes is look like a monster in size, but what are the lengths of those cars in that unit?
To my knowledge the Long Tom isn't 30 meters long. I could be wrong though.
I guess reminding you that the game can not hit something the size of a house moving in a distance of even 1 km. 25 hexes is only 750 meters.
Carriers that operate underwater has more to it then just water tight doors. That is not saying it shouldn't be possible, but so far, not much else shows it can be done.
And with all of this, we still don't have any stats on how this even begins to fit into the game. Unless it is going to be one of those units that never gets anything solid about it, and just does what ever with what ever.
|
Karagin
03/09/21 07:30 PM
70.118.172.64
|
Okay, Depth charges then, undersea mines, etc...you introduce something new and folks will find and introduce counters to it.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
03/10/21 02:06 AM
66.74.60.165
|
Stealth subs would be one of the first to come up.
Then the main one that someone loves so much against warships. The use of nukes. The answer to anything that might cause some damage to the attackers. Might even suggest the 5 ton alamo built for underwater use. I am sure they could find someone to manually guide it in to save their world.
This unit would mainly be used in defenses on allied worlds. Trying to use it as an offensive unit means a whole lot of crap. The first time or two it is used, would have the surprise factor to it, but afterwards, the defenders would start moving to defeat it.
The ability to move this would be limited even more then super heavy units. Sure, you can partially disassemble it, but the more you take apart, the more you have to put back together again. And this is definitely something the enemy will notice and strike at. Might work to the attackers advantage if they do the what ever it takes method.
Any enemy worth a damn, would make sure the transport dropship would die.
As a side note, this would have to have multiple dropship accompany it, as the forces that would be stationed on board would have to be moved separately. You can not keep the unit partially loaded with the machines in flight. It would NOT travel well outside of dropships or jumpships.
Before you even try to say anything to negate this, show the stats. Including how you move this to other worlds. The ships that move this would have to be modified to do so. It will not just fit on/into a standard dropship.
|
Karagin
03/10/21 04:02 PM
70.118.172.64
|
Or elementals carrying bombs etc....
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Requiem
03/10/21 04:30 PM
1.158.229.22
|
Nukes – as stated previously either you have them in the game and ensure M.A.D. prevails or you have the Ares convention and they are removed from the game permanently. Please make a personal choice for YOUR game as I have chosen mine.
Quote:
The first time or two it is used, would have the surprise factor to it, but afterwards, the defenders would start moving to defeat it.
First you have to find it.
Quote:
you can partially disassemble it, but the more you take apart, the more you have to put back together again.
This ship is built for a specific world’s sea – it should never be disassembled and remade on another world!
Thus every world where one is required the facility to manufacture a ship of this class is built together with the dry dock.
All small easily to transport components will be brought in off world to assist with its manufacture.
Then it all comes down to where it is manufactured on the world in question – hidden fortress facility like the German submarine naval pens comes to mind here. Thus the spy and sabotage are the only real threat.
As for elementals carrying bombs – this is why you have base / planetary security forces – commando forces Vs base security are always an issue in any game. Except for the Clan Invasion when the concept was just ignored.
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.
|
ghostrider
03/10/21 05:32 PM
66.74.60.165
|
The ship was transported in three main sections to the Capellan world of Principia in 3069.
This is part of the statement in the wiki that YOU wanted to highlight abotu the Kraken Unleashed merc unit. You didn't read the whole thing? Or was it forgotten like a lot of other facts?
It isn't cloaked, nor is does it not cause energy waves when it moves. Give the rules for the game, the sensors of units cause issues with them detecting it, but yet the mining satelites on Outreach could detect the movement of mechs on the surface during the testing ground fight. Sonar can detect ships moving from such issues. But I will give you the game would allow it to be difficult to find. But following forces back to it isn't that difficult.
Having and using nukes are not one and the same. As you like to say nukes are needed if the IS doesn't have warships, this is your very own argument used against you.
But you can use conventional torpedoes to focus on the craft when moving. The propellers do make sounds that can be followed.
As stated, once they know what it is, they will find it. Might take some time, but then how do you use it trying to hide all the time?
|
Karagin
03/10/21 05:44 PM
70.118.172.64
|
Finding a ship or anything in any environment comes down to training and equipment, NOTHING is going to stay hidden for every.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Requiem
03/10/21 06:04 PM
1.158.229.22
|
and for everything that can be destroyed can also be re-built over and over until it remains ….
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
03/10/21 09:07 PM
70.118.172.64
|
Well, it's your group, I guess that if you want uber everything, then hey have at it. The rest of us want some reality tempered with some gamism with fun. In other words, things don't work and they aren't perfect and if something is not balanced out then the game is not fun. Frankly, that is what you are doing here, you want something that works HOW you want it regardless of game balance or fun. Everything in Battletech has a trade-off, one that either makes it worth using or not.
Sure your wonder toy can be rebuilt but tells us how in your version of things, are the continued cost of spending billions these subs or what ever it is going to be justified in a manner that to the folks playing that make sense? If you look at all the games there are always counters to even the most powerful item.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Requiem
03/10/21 09:16 PM
1.158.229.22
|
Simple – opportunity cost forgone – compare the price of a static Castle Brian to that of an optional submarine and submersible base - some worlds where water is the majority of the world a sub. base would be more advantageous that than of a static base.
All I am allowing is an alternative base for worlds who’s military would prefer an option to that of a static base.
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.
|
ghostrider
03/10/21 11:53 PM
66.74.60.165
|
Still have not seen any stats on the unit.
The idea and use of a mobile base isn't the main issue here. It is how something that isn't canon is being presented to an alternative to canon, yet is presented in a way that violates the entire premise of the argument.
This started out as changing a unit listed in the wiki, and saying it would be changed to something that can't exist in the game without a bunch of house rules, on up to violating the whole thing. As there is nothing in the opening thread to say anything other then a canon unit is being modified, and yet nothing said about any sort of alt, only to have it said once being called out on violations and such of that, does it run into this is for an alt.
A lot of people bring up variations of units that fit into the game, that is done for their benefit, but it does NOT violate the rules of the game.
Saying this is how canon should be, does not work with the designs that don't follow canon. Swapping out the long toms for arrows is fine. Surface, fire and set up for another shot. Adding in engines that violates canon doesn't work, when suggesting it is superior to canon.
The conventions is a piece of paper that does NOT remove them from existence. Nukes will be required at times, though it does NOT have to be in battle with each other. Taking out an asteroid or space debris will be required, and nukes would be the way to do so. But even then, someone would sabotage a reactor and use it that way.
And by the way, the Hydrogen bomb is far more destructive then a nuclear bomb is. At least in an atmosphere.
|
Requiem
03/11/21 03:21 AM
1.158.229.22
|
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Argo_Submersible_Carrier
As of this writing, there are no published record sheets for the Argo nor there is any official listing for it's Battle Value in it's profile on the Master Unit List for Catalyst Game Labs.
Question how can you create a variant record sheet when even Canon uses theirs as an NPC?
Also as stated previously – this an in House Creation – if it violates every construction rule in the book then so be it – this is an NPC that is to remain in the background – how it was created can be as elusive as that of some of the WOB creations that popped into existence and were never seen again.
In all reality if a person wants to introduce something of note they do not have to forever follow the rules set down by Canon – as some of the construction rules make no sense whatsoever ….
If an engineer can jerry rig anything to work then it should be allowed – if a house / periphery state have engineers that think outside of canon’s norm because they believe in the aesthetics of a series of crafts then so be it ….
Just remaining with the canon permanently does not have to be the only way …. Create your own universe … create your own houses …. Create your own history …. Create your own home rules if necessary…. Just have fun!
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.
|
|
|
Extra information
|
0 registered and 164 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: 6568
|
|
|
|
|
|
|