Bob_Richter
12/01/01 12:15 AM
134.121.144.40
|
BattleMech Technical Readout
Type/Model: Artemis ART-1S
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3025
Config: Biped BattleMech
Rules: Level 1, Standard design
Mass: 55 tons
Chassis: Standard
Power Plant: 275 Core Tek Fusion
Walking Speed: 54.0 km/h
Maximum Speed: 86.4 km/h
Jump Jets: None
Jump Capacity: 0 meters
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
2 Medium Lasers
2 LRM 15s
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)
==Overview:==
The Artemis is a poor-man's Archer. Though quicker, it is also clearly desi
for fire support, and while being much lighter, it is nearly as effective.
(In other words, THIS is a fire-support 'Mech, you ninnies. Learn the
difference.)
--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Artemis ART-1S
Mass: 55 tons
Equipment: Crits Mass
Int. Struct.: 91 pts Standard 0 5.50
Engine: 275 6 15.50
Walking MP: 5
Running MP: 8
Jumping MP: 0
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Gyro: 4 3.00
Cockpit, Life Supt., Sensors: 5 3.00
Actuators: L: Sh+UA+LA+H R: Sh+UA+LA+H 16 .00
Armor Factor: 128 pts Standard 0 8.00
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Head: 3 9
Center Torso: 18 17
Center Torso (Rear): 6
L/R Side Torso: 13 14/14
L/R Side Torso (Rear): 4/4
L/R Arm: 9 12/12
L/R Leg: 13 18/18
Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Crits Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Medium Laser RA 3 1 1.00
1 Medium Laser LA 3 1 1.00
1 LRM 15 RT 5 32 7 11.00
(Ammo Locations: 2 LT, 2 RT)
1 LRM 15 LT 5 3 7.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 16 43 55.00
Crits & Tons Left: 35 .00
Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 4,795,906 C-Bills
Battle Value: 886
Cost per BV: 5,412.99
Weapon Value: 687 / 687 (Ratio = .78 / .78)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 12; MRDmg = 14; LRDmg = 8
BattleForce2: MP: 5, Armor/Structure: 3/5
Damage PB/M/L: 2/2/1, Overheat: 1
Class: MM; Point Value: 9
Specials: if
-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
12/01/01 12:33 AM
12.78.130.114
|
This is an Apollo, though a nice L1 retread.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
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
12/01/01 12:55 AM
134.121.144.40
|
I tend to forget that it even exists. Nice catch, though.
-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
12/01/01 12:56 AM
134.121.144.40
|
(You will remember, by the way, that Artemis is Apollo's sister, and they were counted equals with the bow, their favored weapon. :) )
-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
12/01/01 01:30 AM
12.78.130.114
|
Oh, gee, I just thought you were making a variant of the Apollo that it differed enough to rate a new name and automatically selected Apollo's sister, Artemis, who was his equal with a bow. Really. :)
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
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
12/02/01 08:18 PM
63.173.170.64
|
I think you did a better job with the Tiger Hawk...this is a very nice version of a level one take on the Marik Apollo or a upgraded Gladiator mech from Battletechnologies, one of the early Battledroids, with your mech not having the jump jets it has and going with LRM-15s of LRM-10s, but does add in a nice support mech to the game.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
12/02/01 08:47 PM
134.121.144.40
|
Tiger's not a support 'Mech. Support 'Mechs don't need jump jets, and they rarely find them useful.
While we're at it, they don't need 5/8 movement either.
The Dervish isn't, strictly speaking, a fire support 'Mech either. It's a multrole 'Mech. Like the Shadow Hawk, it is capable of fighting at any range and can apply itself to a wide variety of tasks. Sadly, it lacks the armor to truly match up against the Shadow Hawk. The TigerHawk does not.
When will you folks learn that weapon type is not the sole determiner of a 'Mech's role?
Well, Karagin, I suppose you never will.
Hm.
Oh well.
This thing puts out good firepower and has a NICE LONG MAGAZINE. It can whoop a Trebuchet in a range duel and, unlike the Tiger, is actually a useful fire-support machine (the Tiger would have been a poor choice for that role next to the Trebuchet, IMHO.)
-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.
:)
|
Karagin
12/02/01 10:27 PM
63.173.170.11
|
If you say so Bob, you are better then anyone else at building mechs, you know all.
The weapon systems dictate what role the unit get's used in, but I guess you will never see that either.
And your two missile boats ARE NOT close in fighters, but you won't see that either...
So why are you posting them if you DON'T want us to tell you what we think of them and to give you better ideas or other ways to use them etc...cause it sounds, based on all your replies that you don't want our input cause to you these mechs are already perfect...
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
12/02/01 10:29 PM
134.121.144.40
|
>>> If you say so Bob, you are better then anyone else at building mechs, you know all. <<<
Damn straight. Glad you think so.
Shut up, foo!
:)
-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.
:)
|
Karagin
12/02/01 10:30 PM
63.173.170.11
|
Nice to see that you can act like this all the time.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
12/02/01 10:31 PM
134.121.144.40
|
:)
-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.
:)
|
Karagin
12/02/01 10:33 PM
63.173.170.11
|
the only fool is you.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
12/02/01 10:37 PM
134.121.144.40
|
:)
This is fun!
:)
-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.
:)
|
NathanKell
12/02/01 10:49 PM
24.44.238.206
|
In reply to:
The weapon systems dictate what role the unit get's used in...
Help determine. Not dictate.
If you have a mech with an AC/10, is automatically it a front-line machine? With a PPC, is it automatically a sniper?
What if your nice AC/10 slugger has....
no armor?
Speed 8/12?
It must still be a front line machine--after all, weapons loadout dictates role.
-NathanKell, BT Space Wars
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
Thomas Jefferson |
NathanKell
12/02/01 10:51 PM
24.44.238.206
|
Please explain why a mech that devotes only 2/3 of its weapon weight (and only *half* its number) to missiles (i.e., the TigerHawk) is somehow a missile boat, let alone not a close in fighter?
Is it because it does more damage than the comparable close in fighter?
Is it because it's as fast (or slow) as the comparable close in fighter?
Is it because it has exactly the same armor as the comparable close in fighter?
-NathanKell, BT Space Wars
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
Thomas Jefferson |
LordChaos
12/02/01 10:52 PM
216.161.103.90
|
no. Designed mission determins loadout and performance. However, due to the time between design request and combat delivery, said mission may not be were it's used at.
Real mechwariors pilot IS mechs.
|
Karagin
12/02/01 11:10 PM
63.173.170.11
|
The main weapons on the Tiger Hawk are missile weapons, that makes it a missile boat, the meds are there as secondary support weapons for the missiles.
It's speed allows it to move from fire postion to fire postion and allows it to add to the over flexibilty of the side using it in that it give them a lot manuever to get the better ground to have both LOS and range to hararass and hammer the enemy while keeping him OUT of close range and reducing the chances of taking crippling damage.
Does that help?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
12/02/01 11:16 PM
134.121.144.40
|
I disagree.
As the designer (and sole user, at this point) of the TigerHawk, I can tell you that the Medium Lasers are its primary weapons.
By your logic, that makes it a Laser Boat.
Furthermore, it is among the toughest 55 ton 'Mechs in 3025. There is clearly no need to keep it far from the fight to avoid it taking crippling damage, when it would be so much more effective using its maneuverability and close-range firepower to keep the enemy off-balance.
-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.
:)
|
Karagin
12/02/01 11:19 PM
63.173.170.11
|
Sorry that you disagree.
I think I answered his questions and explained WHY I see the tiger hawk and the Artimes as support mechs more so then infighters...if not then when he ask for me for more I will post more.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
12/02/01 11:28 PM
134.121.144.40
|
The Artemis is a support 'Mech.
But I rebutted your points regarding the TigerHawk.
-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
12/03/01 07:24 AM
204.245.128.108
|
>The main weapons on the Tiger Hawk are missile weapons,
Sez who? I didn't see that in the write up of the Tiger Hawk.
>that makes it a missile boat, the meds are there as secondary support weapons for the missiles
Sez who? The Tiger Hawk has more firepower in its medium lasers than its LRM 5s.
The key question is: Was the Tigerhawk procured as a missile boat? If not, your point is incorrect. The Tiger Hawk's role is what the procurement agency declares it to be, particularly until it sees enough combat use in other roles to earn a different classification.
It is entirely possible for the procurement agency to be incorrect (see: Me-262, procured as a "lightning bomber", better suited to be an interceptor), but in the Tiger Hawk's case, it does more damage with its short range weapons than its long. It is quite fair for it to be purchased for use as a close-in fighter or (per the original blurb) a multi-role mech.
You can also certainly use it as a missile boat, which would constitute an obvious adaptation of a mech designed for another purpose.
>It's speed allows it to move from fire postion to fire postion and allows it to add to the over flexibilty of the side using it in that it give them a lot manuever to get the better ground to have both LOS and range to hararass and hammer the enemy while keeping him OUT of close range and reducing the chances of taking crippling damage.
Yes, yes, the Tiger Hawk makes a fine fire support mech. That does not mean it *IS* exclusively a fire support mech until field commanders use it only in that role.
>Does that help?
Not really. You're trying to tell the mech's designer how to use a mech that can just as validly be used as a multi-role design or a close-in fighter. The Tiger Hawk has potent (for an L1 medium) short and long range firepower, with a slight emphasis on short range firepower. Considering the Tiger Hawk has not seen much exclusive use in a fire support roles, it's sort of silly for you to argue that it's anything other than what the procurement agency wanted the Tiger Hawk for: a multi-role replacement for the Shadowhawk.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
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
12/03/01 02:29 PM
63.173.170.37
|
Using it as a close in fighter defeats the purpose of having the LRMs on it. Why have them if you are going to be fighting at 6 hexs or less?
And the military will find a why to get the best out of the mech, and given that it has the LRMs then it is going to be used by them as a support mech, NOT an in-fighter. For an example look at the M-2 and M-3 Bradely IFV. Everyone knows it's APC with a turret that is suppose to be used to support the infantry riding inside of it. BUT when it first was given to the troops a lot of commanders thought they had a light tank, this came from the idea that the Bradely had an autocannon on it, the 25mm Bushwacker AC, and the ATGM of the TOW System, and everytime in excerises in Germany and at NTC when the Bradely was used as a tank it was blown up time and time again.
Desert Storm helped some what to get this idea out of the thinking patterns but not to much, the idea is still there, that the Bradely is a tank that happens to carry infantry...so the Tiger Hawk, while the overall the design was not intented to be a fire support mech, will be pushed into that role mainly because of it's weapons and the need for such on the battlefield.
So the point is vaild.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Cray
12/03/01 02:55 PM
204.245.128.108
|
>And your two missile boats ARE NOT close in fighters, but you won't see that either...
I should bring this up again. This was your mistake to begin with. The Tiger Hawk is not trying to be JUST a close-in fighter. If you read the blurb, it is a multi-role mech.
To be a multi-role mech, a mech needs weapons for more than one range, and it needs about equal levels of firepower in all of its range classes - otherwise it gets shoehorned into one role and thus ceases to be a multi-role mech. The Tiger Hawk does this: it has about equal long- and short-range firepower.
>Using it as a close in fighter defeats the purpose of having the LRMs on it.
How many of your mechs do you build with weapons with just one range class?
The Tiger Hawk is just what the blurb says: a multi-role mech. It can fight at long and short ranges with equal aplomb. It actually has more short range firepower than long range firepower. Commanders can apply it either as a short-range brawler when the enemy gets close or use it as a fire support mech: the Tiger Hawk is a multi-role mech, just as described.
Where do you get this obsession with the Tiger Hawk trying to be only a close-in mech?
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
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
12/03/01 05:40 PM
63.173.170.7
|
The Tiger Hawk is not a multi-role mech, it's a support mech, that is best used standing on hill or hiding behind a hill and firing it's LRMs...
The idea of only having Medium Lasers as the SOLE weapon to rely on in close in fighting tells me that getting this mech close to another one is stupid and will cost me a mech...
I read the blurp, and Bob is trying to replace the Shadow Hawk, all fine and good, BUT this mechs doesn't even come close to do that.
Not an obssesscion, just look at it's main weapons, LRMs, that means it's best to use it as a long range harasser and not run up and try to dance with the enemy.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
12/03/01 07:09 PM
63.173.170.7
|
Right okay...sure...BUT those mediums are NOT the only weapons able to do damage at close range on those in-fighters.
The tiger hawk fails at being an in-fighter cause it's main weapons are NOT suited for suck fighting...now if the LRMs were dropped to say SRMs then yes I would agree that it is an in-fighter, but with LRMs it's a support mech, that is better at replacing the aging Dervish just as the Artiemis is at replacing some of the other MEDIUM missile based support mechs.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
12/04/01 12:36 AM
63.173.170.141
|
The Tiger Hawk has decent long range firepower, but it doesn't have the extra punch to kill things at medium to short range to be even consider a multi-role fighter.
And yes a lot of mechs have MLs as their main weapons, but they also have the speed to get out of trouble, this mech doesn't have the speed to simple run off. And using it as a front line slugger is going to cost you a pilot if not the battle.
The mech is decent for supporting an attack, or helping it's lance mates chase of the enemy, but it doesn't have the staying or killing power to be close in fighter OR a multi-role fighter.
Your examples were nice, but did you notice they were all lighter then the Tiger Hawk? Did you notice your first two are for the most part scout mechs or harassers? I think you might want to try convincing your brother to live with the fact that he built a fire support mechs that is able to one job only and that is it.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Bob_Richter
12/04/01 01:06 AM
134.121.144.40
|
You will undoubtedly note that the Hunchback is both not significantly lighter than the Tiger Hawk and also a great deal slower.
With that in mind, I will destroy your remaining arguments.
The TigerHawk (as compared to its 55 ton contemporaries) is not lacking in armor, ammunition endurance, or firepower for a close-range engagement. In fact, in all but the first, it is superior. In the first, it is equal.
At middle-ranges, it is true, it lacks some "punch". This happens when a 'Mech is developed to be useful in any of a variety of roles, its performance in each of the roles suffers. But please do tell me how your beloved Shadow Hawk is different? You're not going to bring up that quaint-but useless Autocannon again? Or the SRM launcher, which is one of the most inefficient weapons in 3025? Please do spare me.
>>>And using it as a front line slugger is going
to cost you a pilot if not the battle. <<<
Frankly, I don't see how. There are few 'Mechs in 3025 (most larger and slower) who can begin to match it in the brawler role. Its maneuverability is a great asset in such a role, and I don't think you give that enough credit. How do you propose that this well-armored and well-armed 'Mech is somehow less suited to this role than, say, your precious Shadow Hawk?
>>>The mech is decent for supporting an attack, or helping it's lance mates chase of the enemy,<<<
If you wish to use it in such a capacity, the TigerHawk's versatile design will, naturally, accomodate you.
>>>but it
doesn't have the staying or killing power to be close in fighter OR a multi-role fighter. <<<
But this assertion is fundamentally false, and I challenge you to prove it.
-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.
:)
|
Acolyte
12/04/01 03:19 AM
142.179.28.75
|
I like this! I might just add it to my game. Any hints as to it's appearance (i.e. which mini to represent)?
Light a fire for a man, and you keep him warm for one night,
Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Acolyte
|
Bob_Richter
12/04/01 03:56 AM
134.121.144.40
|
It appears to be a technologically backward Apollo. :)
I don't really know. I didn't put much thought into it...I was simply designing a fairly generic 55 ton fire-support missile boat.
-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.
:)
|
Acolyte
12/04/01 04:06 AM
142.179.28.75
|
Well, three points in it's favor.
1 good design
2 3025 level 1 design
3 NOT 100 tons 
Light a fire for a man, and you keep him warm for one night,
Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Acolyte
|