Maus (Super Heavy Tank)

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)
ATN082268
01/02/14 04:23 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Maus
Tech: Clan / 3072
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Custom design

Mass: 185 tons
Power Plant: 370 XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 21.6 km/h
Maximum Speed: 32.4 km/h
Armor Type: Hardened

Armament:
1 Arrow IV System
1 LRM 20
1 SRM 6
2 ER Medium Lasers
2 Anti-Missile Systems
1 Angel ECM Suite

Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Maus
Mass: 185 tons
Construction Options: Fractional Accounting

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 95 pts Standard 0 37.00
Engine: 370 XL Fusion 1 18.25
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 9.13
Cruise MP: 2
Flank MP: 3
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 9.25
Crew: 13 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.85
Sponson Turret Equipment: 0 .30
Armor Factor: 300 pts Hardened 0 37.50

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 19 50
Front L / R Sides: 19 45/45
Rear L / R Sides: 19 40/40
Rear: 19 40
Turret: 19 40

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Arrow IV System Turret 0 25 2 17.00
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 20 2 8.33
1 SRM 6 Turret 0 15 2 2.50
1 ER Medium Laser Lf_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Lf_Spon 0 20 2 1.33
1 ER Medium Laser Rt_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Rt_Spon 0 20 1 1.33
1 Angel ECM Suite Body 0 1 1.50
1 C.A.S.E. Equipment Body 0 .00
Armored Motive System Body 1 18.50
Environmental Sealing Body 1 18.50
Cargo Bay Capacity Body 1 .72
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 16 185.00
Items & Tons Left: 26 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 72,926,938 C-Bills
Battle Value: 1,429
Cost per BV: 51,033.55
Weapon Value: 2,678 / 2,678 (Ratio = 1.87 / 1.87)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 41; MRDmg = 29; LRDmg = 18
BattleForce2: MP: 2, Armor/Structure: 0 / 23
Damage PB/M/L: 6/5/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 14
Specials: ecm, artA
Karagin
01/02/14 10:02 AM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
ATN, this one is no different then your others. It is still a sitting duck and has all of the same weaknesses as the other super heavies you have given us. For the same price any faction could have 4 or more Arrow IV equipped faster and lighter tanks that can do the job this single tank does and do it better.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Reiter
01/02/14 01:46 PM
142.11.67.185

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Almost. Could like this. Like it was said, can be done with smaller units, in BT i could see maybe 2 or 3 ac/20 for a mass. Cover story, super weapon captured by Alex kerensky after the liberation of terra from amaris who was going to use it as a last ditch defense weapon.
Karagin
01/02/14 02:02 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Code:
          BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Mighty Mouse
Tech: Clan / 3060
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Standard design

Mass: 90 tons
Power Plant: 270 XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Ferro-Fibrous
Armament:
1 Arrow IV System
1 LRM 20
1 SRM 6
2 Anti-Missile Systems
2 ER Medium Lasers
1 Angel ECM Suite
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Mighty Mouse
Mass: 90 tons
Construction Options: Fractional Accounting

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 45 pts Standard 0 9.00
Engine: 270 XL Fusion 1 7.25
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 3.63
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 4.50
Crew: 6 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.95
Armor Factor: 377 pts Ferro-Fibrous 1 19.64

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 9 114
Left / Right Sides: 9 75/75
Rear: 9 50
Turret: 9 63

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Arrow IV System Turret 0 15 2 15.00
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 18 2 8.00
1 SRM 6 Turret 0 15 2 2.50
2 Anti-Missile Systems Turret 0 48 3 3.00
2 ER Medium Lasers Front 10 2 2.00
1 Angel ECM Suite Body 0 1 1.50
1 C.A.S.E. Equipment Body 0 .00
1 Trailer Hitch Rear 1 .00
Armored Movtive System Body 1 8.03
Environmental Sealing Body 1 4.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 17 90.00
Items & Tons Left: 6 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 17,306,245 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 2,273 (old BV = 1,496)
Cost per BV: 7,613.83
Weapon Value: 2,534 / 2,534 (Ratio = 1.11 / 1.11)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 41; MRDmg = 29; LRDmg = 18
BattleForce2: MP: 3T, Armor/Structure: 0 / 14
Damage PB/M/L: 4/4/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 23
Specials: ecm, artA


Cheaper, SAME weapon load out, faster and a smaller crew...for the Clans this would win out over your's ATN on cost alone.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
01/02/14 05:23 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I think you guys derped out and don't realize this is based off of the real-world german WWII prototype Panzer VIII Maus, almost down to the tonnage.(Should be 188 tonnes). To better replicate it, it should have a 1/2 movement speed(RL Maus cruised around at 13 km/h, but the desired specs were 20km/h.), I.C.E. engine. Add a heavy or iHGauss as that's the biggest cannon you can have. Or use a dual HAG/40 if you want it turret mounted. Maybe a LB-X AC/20 as a secondary weapon, as the RL Maus had a massive 75mm as a secondary...
There were also some MG ports and a close range mortar system used, so a mech mortar and a couple MGs scattered across the base to top it off.
Everyone is missing the point that the existance of the tank is purely for additional flavor.
Karagin
01/02/14 09:10 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I know what is is based off, do a search on here, I already posted a version of this tank before. And no not missing the point, the tank and all the super heavies as the rules allow are pretty pointless and a waste of resources in a universe where they have enough problems making warships so why would they waste resources on a what is nothing more then a mobile bunker?

And yet again this tank of ATN is the same clone, renamed yet again, same basic weapon load out, and same set up as just about ALL of his other ones.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
01/02/14 09:57 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Seeing as though you are still on the "waste of resources" tidbit, yes, you are missing the point.

There is no practical purpose for superheavies, they are flavor, where some reincarnations of the designers of the P.1000 Ratte or T-35 decides making some super heavy thing is practical.

Same with the very first Charger mech, that superheavy tank with 1 Cruise Missile 50 missile, XXL engines... It's not as if logic is abundant in the universe, so this tank can exist.
Karagin
01/02/14 11:25 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I guess we are going to disagree on this one, cause I don't see any power in the BT universe actively building these things given that losing one is far worse then losing an assault mech. And they are NOT practical at all.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
01/02/14 11:45 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Some idiot tried to construct the Matar, which has nonfunctional leg actuators. I think it's safe to say that anything goes.
Rotwang
01/04/14 06:35 AM
94.227.126.162

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Any sufficiently delusional Inner Sphere leader may order to have something like that constructed because they may hold the irrational belief that bigger is definitely better. History is full of "prestige" weapon projects that proved to be useless on the battlefield.
CrayModerator
01/04/14 11:16 AM
97.101.96.171

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
History is full of "prestige" weapon projects that proved to be useless on the battlefield.



Tsar Bomba
Tsar Cannon
Tsar Tank
Tsar Etc
2B1 Oka
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.
ATN082268
01/08/14 07:18 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Maus II
Tech: Clan / 3072
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Custom design

Mass: 185 tons
Power Plant: 370 XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 21.6 km/h
Maximum Speed: 32.4 km/h
Armor Type: Hardened

Armament:
1 Large Pulse Laser
1 LRM 20
5 SRM 6s
2 Anti-Missile Systems
1 Angel ECM Suite

Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Maus II
Mass: 185 tons
Construction Options: Fractional Accounting

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 95 pts Standard 0 37.00
Engine: 370 XL Fusion 1 18.25
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 9.13
Cruise MP: 2
Flank MP: 3
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 9.25
Crew: 13 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.25
Sponson Turret Equipment: 0 .70
Armor Factor: 319 pts Hardened 0 39.88

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 19 55
Front L / R Sides: 19 50/50
Rear L / R Sides: 19 40/40
Rear: 19 40
Turret: 19 44

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Large Pulse Laser Turret 10 1 6.00
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 25 2 9.17
1 SRM 6 Turret 0 15 2 2.50
2 SRM 6s Lf_Spon 0 30 2 5.00
1 Anti-Missile System Lf_Spon 0 20 2 1.33
2 SRM 6s Rt_Spon 0 30 2 5.00
1 Anti-Missile System Rt_Spon 0 20 1 1.33
1 Angel ECM Suite Body 0 1 1.50
1 C.A.S.E. Equipment Body 0 .00
Armored Motive System Body 1 18.50
Environmental Sealing Body 1 18.50
Cargo Bay Capacity Body 1 .71
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 17 185.00
Items & Tons Left: 25 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 72,893,658 C-Bills
Battle Value: 1,547
Cost per BV: 47,119.37
Weapon Value: 3,434 / 3,434 (Ratio = 2.22 / 2.22)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 52; MRDmg = 23; LRDmg = 11
BattleForce2: MP: 2, Armor/Structure: 0 / 24
Damage PB/M/L: 8/6/2, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 15
Specials: if, ecm
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
01/08/14 09:03 AM
172.56.38.133

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Another artillery/aircraft practice target?

You do know that a offering a cardboard box would more cost affective target for your to give your enemy time to practice shooting at you don't you?
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
ghostrider
01/08/14 01:37 PM
66.74.101.135

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
What are all these super heavy tanks for? destroying bridges when you try to get over them? Most have 100 ton or under capacity.

A single infantryman with the right equipment would continue to cost you alot of money disabling, or destroying your arsenal.

From a clan stance, these super heavy tanks are a vulgar waste of resources. Most dislike tanks to begin with, but they cannt keep up with unmounted elemental armor. A star of elementals would take these out rather quickly. Especially if there is any terrain/woods they could use the get near it. Even a simple raid on your base would do so.

Now if you made one as a mobile repair base, then it might be worth it.
Retry
01/08/14 07:19 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I have 100 tonners better protected than this. I don't actually use them, as an infantry ta... mech, I never really get to use a large amount of infantry very often.

Maybe it's a troll tank to act like a boss or something in some game, idk.
Karagin
01/08/14 08:00 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It is the same stuff he keeps posting, he doesn't care if we like it or not, he wants the attention. His stuff is not even remotely viable even for Battletech. The same crawling pill box can be built for far less and yet when that is shown to him he ignores it.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
ATN082268
01/09/14 02:25 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Maus III
Tech: Clan / 3072
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Custom design

Mass: 185 tons
Power Plant: 370 XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 21.6 km/h
Maximum Speed: 32.4 km/h
Armor Type: Hardened

Armament:
1 Gauss Rifle
1 LRM 20
1 SRM 6
2 ER Medium Lasers
2 Anti-Missile Systems
1 Angel ECM Suite

Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Maus III
Mass: 185 tons
Construction Options: Fractional Accounting

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 95 pts Standard 0 37.00
Engine: 370 XL Fusion 1 18.25
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 9.13
Cruise MP: 2
Flank MP: 3
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 9.25
Crew: 13 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.85
Sponson Turret Equipment: 0 .30
Armor Factor: 320 pts Hardened 0 40.00

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 19 55
Front L / R Sides: 19 50/50
Rear L / R Sides: 19 40/40
Rear: 19 40
Turret: 19 45

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Gauss Rifle Turret 0 25 2 15.13
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 20 2 8.33
1 SRM 6 Turret 0 15 2 2.50
1 ER Medium Laser Lf_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Lf_Spon 0 20 2 1.33
1 ER Medium Laser Rt_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Rt_Spon 0 20 1 1.33
1 Angel ECM Suite Body 0 1 1.50
1 C.A.S.E. Equipment Body 0 .00
Armored Motive System Body 1 18.50
Environmental Sealing Body 1 18.50
Cargo Bay Capacity Body 1 .10
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 16 185.00
Items & Tons Left: 26 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 72,536,938 C-Bills
Battle Value: 1,617
Cost per BV: 44,858.96
Weapon Value: 2,910 / 2,910 (Ratio = 1.80 / 1.80)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 43; MRDmg = 29; LRDmg = 13
BattleForce2: MP: 2, Armor/Structure: 0 / 25
Damage PB/M/L: 6/5/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 16
Specials: ecm
ATN082268
01/09/14 03:32 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
What are all these super heavy tanks for? destroying bridges when you try to get over them? Most have 100 ton or under capacity.

A single infantryman with the right equipment would continue to cost you alot of money disabling, or destroying your arsenal.

From a clan stance, these super heavy tanks are a vulgar waste of resources. Most dislike tanks to begin with, but they cannt keep up with unmounted elemental armor. A star of elementals would take these out rather quickly. Especially if there is any terrain/woods they could use the get near it. Even a simple raid on your base would do so.

Now if you made one as a mobile repair base, then it might be worth it.




Super Heavy Tanks would mainly be used as fire support which is why the first configuration uses an Arrow IV. And with the design's Environmental Sealing, it can traverse level 1 water with ease. It can also be dropped off anywhere on a planet like any other tank via a Dropship. And I don't see how the Maus is any more vulnerable to sabotage from a single infantryman, for example, than any other tank.

Clan Hell's Horses, for example, favor vehicles. The Maus can keep pace with unmounted Elemental armor that has a jump of 3 in clear terrain (as the Maus can go 2/3) and can outrun the same Elementals on road as the vehicle can then go 3/5. In the case of the first configuration, one Arrow IV round will wipe out any Battlearmor in a particular hex and severly damage any other Battlearmor in any surrounding hexes.

Cost isn't the final determination of whether a design gets built or not in the canon Battletech Universe. There are a lot of canon designs which can be made cheaper and/or alternatives which might be more efficient, among other things. None of that matters though as far as the canon Battletech Universe goes because it simply doesn't operate that way (in general). Some of it, at least in universe, may have to do with transporting smaller number but bigger sized units across the galaxy, politics, etc. Take your pick.
Karagin
01/09/14 06:15 AM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The super tanks offer nothing of tactical value to anyone, which in turns lessens your strategic abilities. They are white elephants that look cool but offer nothing to the user.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
01/09/14 06:45 AM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Code:
          BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Maus V
Tech: Inner Sphere / 3060
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Standard design

Mass: 95 tons
Power Plant: 190 VOX Fusion
Cruise Speed: 21.6 km/h
Maximum Speed: 32.4 km/h
Armor Type: Valiant Lamellor Reactive
Armament:
1 Defiance 5000 Heavy Gauss Rifle
1 Vulcan MDS Model 5B Anti-Missile System
1 Rhinemetal 1000 Gauss Rifle
2 KmC-8000 ER Medium Lasers
Manufacturer: Adon Industries
Location: Alarion
Communications System: CommuTech XL
Targeting & Tracking System: BlazeFire Tracker with RangeCheck

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
==Overview:==
Wishing to impress the Archon-Princess with a powerful home grown super tank,
the engineers at Adon Industries rushed to prefect the pet project of their
head of R&D, Dr. Proschmits.

The Maus III is a dream come true for Dr. Proschmits. After years of trial and
error he could never get a chassis to hold the weight needed to allow it do
mount an effective array of weaponary and still have enough armor to take on
anything on the battlefield.

No one is sure why this vehicle was an obecession with the good doctor, but he
almost broke the company trying to get it made.

==Capabilities:==
The Maus has the fire power to leave a small hilltop. It carries the Defience
5000 Heavy Gauss Rifle. This weapon is one the most powerful gauss rifles in
use by any military. The mounting of it in the front hull area limits it's
overall usage, but that is made up for by the Rhinemetal 1000 Gauss Rifle in
the turret along with the dual KmC-8000 Extended Range Medium Class Lasers. To
round off this impressive arsenal is the Vulcan MDS Model 5B anti-missile
system.

Over all the machine is able to do a lot and the cost compares nicely to some
of the assualt mechs in use by the LAAF.

==Deployment==
Three have been sent to Tharkard to protect the royal palace and the other 4
are being sent to the Defience plant on Hespereus to help defend it from
attack.

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Maus V
Mass: 95 tons

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 50 pts Standard 0 9.50
Engine: 190 Fusion 0 7.50
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 4.00
Cruise MP: 2
Flank MP: 3
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 5.00
Crew: 7 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.50
Armor Factor: 336 pts Reactive 2 21.00

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 10 101
Left / Right Sides: 10 67/67
Rear: 10 45
Turret: 10 56

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Heavy Gauss Rifle Front 0 16 2 22.00
1 Anti-Missile System Front 0 48 2 4.50
1 Gauss Rifle Turret 0 24 2 18.00
1 ER Medium Laser Front 5 1 1.00
1 ER Medium Laser Front 5 1 1.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 10 95.00
Items & Tons Left: 14 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 6,227,975 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 1,839 (old BV = 1,218)
Cost per BV: 3,386.61
Weapon Value: 1,332 / 1,332 (Ratio = .72 / .72)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 39; MRDmg = 27; LRDmg = 10
BattleForce2: MP: 2T, Armor/Structure: 0 / 13
Damage PB/M/L: 3/5/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 18
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Rotwang
01/09/14 12:05 PM
94.227.126.162

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Super-sized tanks at best end up as specialists used to assault strongpoints or similar jobs, but they are unsuitable for most other tasks.

1) Too slow, they can easily be bypassed by more mobile forces and taken out by airstrikes, artillery etc. Good luck trying to fight a guerilla war with one of those monsters.
2) Logistic nightmares, these tanks take forever to get anywhere, most dropships don't have the means to carry them so you have to expand your logistics systems to modify dropships, trucks and trains to get them anywhere near the fighting. If one breaks down, you need to divert resources to tow them away from the field (if at all possible)
3) Because of their cost there will never be enough of them.
4) They appeal to people with a limited understanding of military tactics and technology. The Germans in WWII proved this many times over. They developed some of the most impressive weapons ever made, and we get all those apologists who say that if the war had gone on for just a few more weeks, the Germans would have suddenly unleashed x or y weapon and walked over the Allies all the way to Seattle. First of all they should have had all those superweapons ready to roll in 1941, when they could still hope to carry the day. As it happens they did have lots of superweapons like the Tiger tank or the Dora giant cannon. But somehow they didn't wipe whole enemy armies off the face of the earth because they may have been super-weapons, they were not invincible. Tiger units were a huge drain on German military capacity. They made fine tanks, but the cost, time and difficulty to build them and the huge attrition due to mechanical weakness and failure was huge. Only at great effort could they keep their Tigers running. They occasionally performed exceptional actions, but they were just occasional force multipliers at best, not the "weapon that will single-handedly win the war"

There is probably room for a few super heavy tanks in the arsenals of the Inner Sphere, but no matter how many you dump onto the battlefield there will be situations where they are worse than useless.
ghostrider
01/09/14 01:20 PM
66.74.101.135

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The tank isnt more vunerable to infantry tactics, but the cost of losing one to them makes it more of a loss.

Another thing canon universe doesnt care about it the life of soldiers. Savanha master hover crafts would eat that thing alive, and once you burned thru your ammo supplies, the enemy could roll in and either destroy it easily, or even capture it. This could be said with other vehicles.

I can see where it may be used as a moble stronghold. Guard a construction site until the defenses can be brought back on line. Maybe people are looking at it the wrong way. This wouldnt be the front line unit, but a support unit. Guarding a pass or something. It would need a few smaller weapons to deal with infantry and such.
Still an expensive unit. It would be cheaper to maybe buy 6 or more achers for under 10 mil to take it out.

The example of WWII, there was one big thing that hurt the germans. The lack of fuel to run the machines. If they had a good steady supply, they would have gone alot longer before falling. Tiger tanks were great, but didnt do much when they couldnt move.
ATN082268
01/11/14 02:18 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Code:
          BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Mighty Mouse
Tech: Clan / 3060
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Standard design

Mass: 90 tons
Power Plant: 270 XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Ferro-Fibrous
Armament:
1 Arrow IV System
1 LRM 20
1 SRM 6
2 Anti-Missile Systems
2 ER Medium Lasers
1 Angel ECM Suite
Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Mighty Mouse
Mass: 90 tons
Construction Options: Fractional Accounting

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 45 pts Standard 0 9.00
Engine: 270 XL Fusion 1 7.25
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 3.63
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 4.50
Crew: 6 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.95
Armor Factor: 377 pts Ferro-Fibrous 1 19.64

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 9 114
Left / Right Sides: 9 75/75
Rear: 9 50
Turret: 9 63

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Arrow IV System Turret 0 15 2 15.00
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 18 2 8.00
1 SRM 6 Turret 0 15 2 2.50
2 Anti-Missile Systems Turret 0 48 3 3.00
2 ER Medium Lasers Front 10 2 2.00
1 Angel ECM Suite Body 0 1 1.50
1 C.A.S.E. Equipment Body 0 .00
1 Trailer Hitch Rear 1 .00
Armored Movtive System Body 1 8.03
Environmental Sealing Body 1 4.00
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 17 90.00
Items & Tons Left: 6 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 17,306,245 C-Bills
Battle Value 2: 2,273 (old BV = 1,496)
Cost per BV: 7,613.83
Weapon Value: 2,534 / 2,534 (Ratio = 1.11 / 1.11)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 41; MRDmg = 29; LRDmg = 18
BattleForce2: MP: 3T, Armor/Structure: 0 / 14
Damage PB/M/L: 4/4/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 23
Specials: ecm, artA


Cheaper, SAME weapon load out, faster and a smaller crew...for the Clans this would win out over your's ATN on cost alone.




Not quite... Your design has less ammunition for the main weapons than the original configuration of the Maus. It also doesn't have Hardened Armor and if it did, it would have around 31 points on each facing and have two less hittable locations. In addition, you incorrectly calculated the tonnage for the Armored Motive System and the Environmental Sealing, each of which is 10% of the design's weight, so your design is also overweight by 5.97 tons...
Karagin
01/11/14 10:20 AM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It has the same weapons, similar load out and moves faster and has equal amount of protection for far less of a price and is more likely to be built. Thus in the long run it is a better take on your super heavy bunker. As for the issue you find to be over weight, simple fix...95 ton tank and shave a bit of the AMS ammo. Done and fixed, which unlike yours would still get built.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.


Edited by Karagin (01/11/14 11:07 AM)
Retry
01/11/14 04:23 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
72 million C-bills. Are you insane? You can make vehicles with half the tonnage and ~10x less cost that is more manouverable and has the same amount of firepower!

I'll take two flights of my Mirage choppers against this Wunderwaffe any day of the week.
Karagin
01/11/14 05:13 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
With my 90/95 ton version you could 4 of them for the same price as ATN's single Uber toy.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
01/11/14 06:05 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I don't like either, but the 95 ton version is much more servicable.
TigerShark
01/11/14 08:21 PM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
It is the same stuff he keeps posting, he doesn't care if we like it or not, he wants the attention. His stuff is not even remotely viable even for Battletech. The same crawling pill box can be built for far less and yet when that is shown to him he ignores it.



Sounds familiar. For someone who does this regularly, you're sure quick to criticize.
Retry
01/11/14 09:21 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I'd rather see smaller stuff. Like VTOLs. No one makes VTOLs, it seems.

I did, but no one liked my FL XL engined VTOL
TigerShark
01/11/14 09:26 PM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
"Super-Heavy" vehicles do work out, though they tend to be out-performed by lighter units. A Super-Heavy VTOL would probably just be a WiGE. And I must say, the Fensalir is more than capable at its job!
Karagin
01/11/14 09:30 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I have posted VTOLs, several of them, though tastes as to what folks want out them vary.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Retry
01/11/14 09:54 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
They don't work very well.

The only superheavy vehicle I can envision working out(compared to lighter units that can do the same job) is a superheavy WiGE or hovercraft. Though, personally, I haven't gotten one to work yet.
ghostrider
01/13/14 01:35 AM
66.74.188.170

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
No one likes to run a unit that tends to die on the first or second hit. The rotor of vtols is just to weak for most combat. It should be allowed to have more armor on it.

But the price was one of the things Karagin has been argueing with atn about. The clans would never waste the resources on tanks like it, even if they don't seem bothered by prices. Well not for a front line unit. They MIGHT for a defensive unit, but doubtful there. It is a semi moble quick base. It may be used to deter pirates, but that is streching it.
TigerShark
01/13/14 02:31 AM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Eh? 1 hit? Rotors take 1 damage per hit, regardless of the actual damage. That means it takes (usually) 5 hits (2 armor + 3 internal) to rip off a rotor. Not very fragile.
ghostrider
01/13/14 09:30 AM
66.74.188.170

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
They must have change that in a newer book. Last I knew Rotors took full damage from what ever weapon they are hit by.

Vtols have their use. Just not as front line combat unless necesary.

And it looks like we are getting off topic again. sheesh.


Edited by ghostrider (01/13/14 09:31 AM)
Retry
01/13/14 06:50 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
See my Mirage Multipurpose VTOL for a frontline helicopter concept.

Anyways, yeah, oversized unit for serious combat.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
01/13/14 09:21 PM
172.56.15.167

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
To my knowledge VTAL rotors have always taken one point of damage no matter what hits it with the exception of a solid object like the ground which automatically destroys it.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
Retry
01/13/14 10:28 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
No, the VTOL rotors take X/10 damage, X being the value of the hit, rounded up. And that is a relatively new rule.

Ferro-Lamellor rotor armor makes rotors stupidly durable to a ridiculous extent, enough to turn them to light mech's worst nightmare from a flying tin can.
ATN082268
01/14/14 12:51 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
It has the same weapons, similar load out and moves faster and has equal amount of protection for far less of a price and is more likely to be built. Thus in the long run it is a better take on your super heavy bunker. As for the issue you find to be over weight, simple fix...95 ton tank and shave a bit of the AMS ammo. Done and fixed, which unlike yours would still get built.



As before, not quite... I ran the numbers on a 90, 95 and 100 ton version of the Maus and they lack armor endurance, not only armor points per side but also having two less facings to be hit (see designs below). What you attempted to do in your design was skimp a bit on the ammunition and make the armor Ferro-Fibrous, desperately trying to give the illusion that your design had the equivalent in protection to the Maus. It does not...

You seem to be unaware that Hardened Armor provides a benefit beyond its mere armor points. Hardened Armor helps a unit equipped with it resist special effects from stuff like Armor Piercing rounds and Taser attacks but more importantly it gives extra critical hit resistence that vehicles so badly need.

And despite what you (and perhaps some others might think), what you like or dislike has absolutely no effect on whether something might show up canon wise in the Battletech universe or not.
ATN082268
01/14/14 12:54 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Pretender Maus I
Tech: Clan / 3072
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Custom design

Mass: 90 tons
Power Plant: 270 XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Hardened

Armament:
1 Arrow IV System
1 LRM 20
1 SRM 6
2 ER Medium Lasers
2 Anti-Missile Systems
1 Angel ECM Suite

Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Pretender Maus I
Mass: 90 tons
Construction Options: Fractional Accounting

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 45 pts Standard 0 9.00
Engine: 270 XL Fusion 1 7.25
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 3.63
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 4.50
Crew: 6 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.85
Sponson Turret Equipment: 0 .30
Armor Factor: 87 pts Hardened 0 10.88

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 9 24
Left / Right Sides: 9 18/18
Rear: 9 12
Turret: 9 15

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Arrow IV System Turret 0 25 2 17.00
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 20 2 8.33
1 SRM 6 Turret 0 15 2 2.50
1 ER Medium Laser Lf_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Lf_Spon 0 20 2 1.33
1 ER Medium Laser Rt_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Rt_Spon 0 20 1 1.33
1 Angel ECM Suite Body 0 1 1.50
1 C.A.S.E. Equipment Body 0 .00
Armored Motive System Body 1 9.00
Environmental Sealing Body 1 9.00
Cargo Bay Capacity Body 1 .59
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 16 90.00
Items & Tons Left: 7 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 17,723,708 C-Bills
Battle Value: 1,257
Cost per BV: 13,384.02
Weapon Value: 1,355 / 1,355 (Ratio = 1.08 / 1.08)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 41; MRDmg = 29; LRDmg = 18
BattleForce2: MP: 3, Armor/Structure: 0 / 7
Damage PB/M/L: 6/5/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 13
Specials: ecm, artA
ATN082268
01/14/14 12:59 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Pretender Maus II
Tech: Clan / 3072
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Custom design

Mass: 95 tons
Power Plant: 285 XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Hardened

Armament:
1 Arrow IV System
1 LRM 20
1 SRM 6
2 ER Medium Lasers
2 Anti-Missile Systems
1 Angel ECM Suite

Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Pretender Maus II
Mass: 95 tons
Construction Options: Fractional Accounting

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 50 pts Standard 0 9.50
Engine: 285 XL Fusion 1 8.25
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 4.13
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 4.75
Crew: 7 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.85
Sponson Turret Equipment: 0 .30
Armor Factor: 101 pts Hardened 0 12.63

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 10 30
Left / Right Sides: 10 20/20
Rear: 10 15
Turret: 10 16

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Arrow IV System Turret 0 25 2 17.00
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 20 2 8.33
1 SRM 6 Turret 0 15 2 2.50
1 ER Medium Laser Lf_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Lf_Spon 0 20 2 1.33
1 ER Medium Laser Rt_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Rt_Spon 0 20 1 1.33
1 Angel ECM Suite Body 0 1 1.50
1 C.A.S.E. Equipment Body 0 .00
Armored Motive System Body 1 9.50
Environmental Sealing Body 1 9.50
Cargo Bay Capacity Body 1 .59
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 16 95.00
Items & Tons Left: 8 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 19,708,187 C-Bills
Battle Value: 1,286
Cost per BV: 14,586.46
Weapon Value: 1,570 / 1,570 (Ratio = 1.22 / 1.22)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 41; MRDmg = 29; LRDmg = 18
BattleForce2: MP: 3, Armor/Structure: 0 / 8
Damage PB/M/L: 6/5/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 13
Specials: ecm, artA
ATN082268
01/14/14 01:03 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
BattleTech Vehicle Technical Readout
VALIDATED

Type/Model: Pretender Maus III
Tech: Clan / 3072
Config: Tracked Vehicle
Rules: Level 3, Custom design

Mass: 100 tons
Power Plant: 300 XL Fusion
Cruise Speed: 32.4 km/h
Maximum Speed: 54.0 km/h
Armor Type: Hardened

Armament:
1 Arrow IV System
1 LRM 20
1 SRM 6
2 ER Medium Lasers
2 Anti-Missile Systems
1 Angel ECM Suite

Manufacturer: (Unknown)
Location: (Unknown)
Communications System: (Unknown)
Targeting & Tracking System: (Unknown)

--------------------------------------------------------
Type/Model: Pretender Maus III
Mass: 100 tons
Construction Options: Fractional Accounting

Equipment: Items Mass
Int. Struct.: 50 pts Standard 0 10.00
Engine: 300 XL Fusion 1 9.50
Shielding & Transmission Equipment: 0 4.75
Cruise MP: 3
Flank MP: 5
Heat Sinks: 10 Single 0 .00
Cockpit & Controls: 0 5.00
Crew: 7 Members 0 .00
Turret Equipment: 0 1.85
Sponson Turret Equipment: 0 .30
Armor Factor: 112 pts Hardened 0 14.00

Internal Armor
Structure Value
Front: 10 33
Left / Right Sides: 10 22/22
Rear: 10 15
Turret: 10 20

Weapons and Equipment Loc Heat Ammo Items Mass
--------------------------------------------------------
1 Arrow IV System Turret 0 25 2 17.00
1 LRM 20 Turret 0 20 2 8.33
1 SRM 6 Turret 0 15 2 2.50
1 ER Medium Laser Lf_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Lf_Spon 0 20 2 1.33
1 ER Medium Laser Rt_Spon 5 1 1.00
1 Anti-Missile System Rt_Spon 0 20 1 1.33
1 Angel ECM Suite Body 0 1 1.50
1 C.A.S.E. Equipment Body 0 .00
Armored Motive System Body 1 10.00
Environmental Sealing Body 1 10.00
Cargo Bay Capacity Body 1 .60
--------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS: 10 16 100.00
Items & Tons Left: 9 .00

Calculated Factors:
Total Cost: 21,841,567 C-Bills
Battle Value: 1,308
Cost per BV: 15,933.92
Weapon Value: 1,722 / 1,722 (Ratio = 1.32 / 1.32)
Damage Factors: SRDmg = 41; MRDmg = 29; LRDmg = 18
BattleForce2: MP: 3, Armor/Structure: 0 / 9
Damage PB/M/L: 6/5/3, Overheat: 0
Class: GA; Point Value: 13
Specials: ecm, artA
Karagin
01/14/14 06:42 AM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
ATN, they OUT preform you super heavy and they can be transported off world, where as your super heavy is limited to the planet is built on. Not something any military wants.

Also the cost is far cheaper for the 90, 95 and 100 ton version which wins over yours since the civilian side of the government, aka the ones who control the money and resources will be more inclined to spend it since they get more for their money.

Every single tank you have posted has both Arrow IV and LRMs, few exceptions, and you seem set on always posting what is a fire support vehicle that has limitations in speed and weight and cost. And none of this seems to be seen by you as an issue, we have pointed out the problems, you stick to your design, which is fine, but even still not a lot of the folks looking for new units to use will be jumping to take a 2/3 185 ton artillery tank that can be tank out with landmines, counter battery fire, aerospace etc..and then there goes your big support unit and a chunk of your BV (if you are using that system) lost to one single attack.

How about you tell us a bit about your take on the BT universe and why you think 110 tons and up super heavy tanks would be the norm or even truly built in more then a one off project that tests out several ideas or theories for design features etc...how about that?
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
01/14/14 07:56 AM
172.56.15.167

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I still dont understand why anyone would want artillery, long range support and close in fighting weapons in one frame.

Putting the extremely heavy cost and and almost non existing strategic mobility aside you're putting everything on one basket. All it takes is one lucky hit and you just lost everything. If you chop it into three vehicles you have a greater chance that something will survive the battle to be used in future battles.

After dumping 73 million C-Bills into your one tank your going to be lacking any other assets because you used up your resources on this one tank.

With your three lighter tanks you can have all three of them and have 13 million C-Bills to buy other assets.

That same 73 million C-Bills could buy you an entire company of medium battle mechs.

Giving you every advantage one could even think of your one tank will be wiped all over the battle field by 12 Enter Sphere medium battle mechs.

I could take out your tank with one aerospace fighter that costs one tenth of your tank.

Yes, the Clans don't like the concept of the use of money but money is a representation of economic resources that one has available to use. Even the Clans don't have unlimited resources at their beck and call.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
ghostrider
01/14/14 01:14 PM
66.74.188.170

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Just curious, but isnt the arrow IV artillery type weapon? I would also want my side to have shells dropping on your units, especially if you have a monsterous force and i have like pure infantry.

But donkey has summed it up better in simpler terms.
There is something that should be added. Your arrow IV system needs to have a designator. By the time it can self designate, the example of a company of light mechs would be about to runs the tank.
Kicks make a very effective attack, and since most mechs dont have leg mounted weapons, it just helps them to get through the armor faster.

I would also like to see a transport that would carry this unit. Once the enemy has encountered this once, I would suspect it would be the first dropship or transport to be targetted.

The newer ones look a little more like they might be used.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
01/14/14 02:47 PM
172.56.15.167

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Here is a force to go up against your tank.
*************************
A battery of four artillery

cost 980,000 CBills

tech level IS 3
chassis track
tank weight 40
engine 120 ICE 8t
cruse speed 3
Flank speed 5
control 2t
IS 4t

Armor 36 4t

Front 4/24
LT/RT 4/15
Back 4/10

Weapons/ammo
Long tom 15t
Long tom ammo (35) 7t
**********************************
A squadron of 12 VTALs for air support

cost 347,589 CBills

tech level IS 3
chassis VTOL
tank weight 11
engine 70 3t
cruse speed 15
Flank speed 23
Lift/rotor/other 1.1t
control .55t
IS 1.1

Armor 36 2.25t

Front 2/15
LT/RT 2/7
Back 2/5
rotor 2/2

Weapons/ammo
3x Med Lasers front 3 3
****************************
A company of long range support

cost 408,250 CBills

tech level L2
chassis Wheeled
tank weight 30t
engine 100 ICE 6t
cruse speed 4
Flank speed 6

control 1.5t
IS 3t

Armor 104 6.5t

Front 3/54
LT/RT 3/20
Back 3/10


Weapons/ammo
Light Gauss Rifle front 12t
LGR ammo (16) 1t
*****************************
A company of heavy APCs

cost 383,300 CBills

tech level IS 3
tank weight 20
chassis type track
engine 100 fusion 4.5t
cruse speed 5
Flank speed 8
Lift/rotor/other none
control 1t
IS 2t

Armor IS/Armor 84 5.25t

Front 2/30
LT/RT 2/15
Back 2/8
Turret 2/16

Weapons/ammo placement weight
Large Laser turret 5
MG front .5
MG ammo (50) body .25
Infantry Squad body 1t
*****************************
A company of medium APCs

cost 275,415 CBills

tech level L1
chassis Wheeled
tank weight 15t
engine 55 Fusion 2.25t
cruse speed 5
Flank speed 8
Lift/rotor/other n/a
control .75t
IS 1.5t

Armor 88p 5.5t

Front 2/25
LT/RT 2/15
Back 2/10
Turret 2/23

Weapons/ammo
3 med lasers turret 3.3t
mg front .5t
mg ammo (40shots) .2t
infantry squad 1t
************************
My reinforced battalion comes up to just under 21 million C-Bills. That is 52 vehicles up against your one tank and I spent about 28.5% of what you would spend on your one tank.

All I really need to do is to set up my artillery up out of range of your tanks Arrow VI system and send in a VTAL to spot out of range of your LRM-20 and just pound you. All it would have cost me is 280,000 C-Bills in Long Tom ammo. Your AMS is useless against artillery shells..

Say I run out of Long Tom ammo. That is unlikely since I have 140 rounds and all it takes is seven hits in one location. But say I do. I can either just sit there and wait to be reloaded with ammo. Or I could send in the rest of my forces to finish you off.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
Retry
01/14/14 03:24 PM
72.214.204.166

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
You wouldn't need a battalion of anything, If you can get a few flights of Meteors laden with RLs or HE bombs, AP AC ammo(the only time it ever shines is on hardened armor) and tandem charge SRM ammunition. Hardened armor arguably makes vehicles more vulnerable to AP than normal because in effect it hits twice as hard as normal ammo, even though it loses a (marginal) crit opportunity. In terms of personnel, it is highly likely the conventional fighter force wins even in that regards.

Environmental sealing? Armored motive system? At the same time? Just take a mech!

P.S. Making the lighter models crappy does not make your superheavy look cool.
P.P.S they are still better than your superheavy.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
01/14/14 05:32 PM
172.56.15.167

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Yes I know that. One aerospace fighter with a full bomb load should do the job.

I was showing what could be bought instead of that money pit of his.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
Karagin
01/14/14 09:02 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Infantry with SRMs could take it out it's slow enough or Battlearmor even the worse designed Battlearmor could take out this 185 ton waste of resources.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
TigerShark
01/14/14 10:43 PM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Infantry with SRMs could take it out it's slow enough or Battlearmor even the worse designed Battlearmor could take out this 185 ton waste of resources.



The designer already stated that his design is more for flavor than min/maxing. Why do you continue on, repeating the same b.s.?

your replies in other threads have stated that you dislike min/maxing. Let's define terms, though, before you wiggle away: Minimizing the flaws // maximizing the capabilities. Wouldn't that be what you suggested?

Quote:
With my 90/95 ton version you could 4 of them for the same price as ATN's single Uber toy.



Let's follow this with a reply from you in the thread aptly entitled "MUNCHKINS":

Quote:
No I am not confused...it's simple if you taken all of the flaws out of a mech then it's no longer balanced thus it falls into the Munchkin line of thinking, the must win with all the new toys at all cost.



Your replies in this thread have been accusing the design of being useless because it isn't optimized enough for your tastes. Another design is more optimal for the job and more efficient, so it's pointless somehow to post something with an in-universe flavor.

So where's that mirror? Where'd I put that..?
Retry
01/14/14 11:10 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Last I checked I said it could be for flavor, not ATN.
Retry
01/14/14 11:17 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Double-checked, nowhere did he say his vehicle was for flavor purposes...
TigerShark
01/14/14 11:18 PM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Cost isn't the final determination of whether a design gets built or not in the canon Battletech Universe. There are a lot of canon designs which can be made cheaper and/or alternatives which might be more efficient, among other things. None of that matters though as far as the canon Battletech Universe goes because it simply doesn't operate that way (in general). Some of it, at least in universe, may have to do with transporting smaller number but bigger sized units across the galaxy, politics, etc. Take your pick.

TigerShark
01/14/14 11:20 PM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
He used in-universe logic to build the design. Unless I misunderstand what the term 'flavor' refers to.
Karagin
01/15/14 06:21 AM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I would say these are here for flavor as in the humor one gets out blowing them up and watching ATN's whole plan fall apart in front of him.

I think we have all seen the person who pins their entire battle plan on how one or two mechs (etc...) will preform and when that doesn't happen or they are destroyed, they lose sight of things and end up losing the battle.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
ghostrider
01/15/14 12:51 PM
66.74.188.170

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
One more thing with vehicles, unless they changed it in the newer books.
Doesnt fire wipe them out? A flamer or inferno srms would be an extreme danger that cannt be ignored.

The arrows have the same issues as normal artillery. They have to do their targetting unless they have the tag lockon. And I think ecm counters the tag.
Retry
01/15/14 05:54 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
His in-universe logic seems lacking.

Basically this seems to be a case of someone using the fallacy "there was an exception, therefore the exception is the rule".

Cost isn't the final determinant... but it's going to be one damn vocal one when you can get a bloody assault MECH with an XL engine and likely pay half the price of one of these.(Not to mention how inefficient the thing is in the first place.)

This is especially for the clans. Even the craziest of factions would find this unit a stretch. If I'd use this tank, I'd use it as an AI commander unit whose purpose is to die in a campaign.

Look at every other canon superheavy design. Almost every living soul laughs at 'em in-universe, let alone out of.

Cost sure as hell is closer to the way it operates than abstract concepts such as BV. No sane military in any canon world thinks like that.

Infernos are deadly, but not nearly as much as they used to be. I say good riddance to that, Mechs don't need any more unfair advantages on their side.

Flamers just suck too much to be of use. The only way they'd be halfway decent is if they dealt both damage and heat at the same time. Why don't they?

ECM counters NARC. TAG isn't. It's basically a laser thing, so ECM wouldn't stop it.

THe closest ECM comes to stopping TAG is by helping to conceal the ECM unit from radar. Which is an advantage until you get spotted.
TigerShark
01/15/14 06:23 PM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Except that many units, like those in the XTRO, are "proof of concept." For all we know, it could be a fine example of a failed prototype. Something the Clans tried as a static defense but was ultimately discontinued due to its resource-heavy requirements.

For example, CJF worked extensively on the LAM concept in its Falcon Eyrie complex on Huntress. They threw thousands of man hours and untold resources trying to get an ancient technology to compete with modern, Clan warfare. Though they developed several prototypes, it was found to be too fragile to continue or scale production upward.

I can see the same thing happening here with a super-heavy vehicle.
Retry
01/15/14 06:34 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I'm fine with the failed prototype here, but he's not selling it as a failed prototype, he's selling it as a serviceable design, which it isn't.
Karagin
01/15/14 09:26 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
He is going beyond serviceable design, he is selling it as the win all battles no matter the odds kind of thing. Everyone's designs have flaws, and again while we defend what we post and try to "sell" the rest around here on our ideas, we normally end up at some point going back and looking at things and going okay change these couple of things get me...or we find out in a battle our super awesome wonder toy failed horrible and maybe all the comments about it were right on target, yet ATN doesn't see or get this, and we get the same design, with a different weight and name every time from him.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Karagin
01/15/14 09:28 PM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:

THe closest ECM comes to stopping TAG is by helping to conceal the ECM unit from radar. Which is an advantage until you get spotted.



And with the VERY LIMITED ECM rules and usage in the game, and the very limited range this tank (as well as all of his other versions) will be seen visual LONG before the ECM can do any good. 100 plus ton super tank is not going to be the size of Prisus
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
ATN082268
01/28/14 02:14 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
I'm fine with the failed prototype here, but he's not selling it as a failed prototype, he's selling it as a serviceable design, which it isn't.



Why would the Maus be a failed prototype? A failed prototype would imply the design has unfixable, major problem(s) with things such as engine and/or suspension, etc which is certainly a possibility in any design but hardly a certainty. You can debate how battleworthy the Maus is but that is wholly different than if its components function or not.

Most of the tactical analysis that I've seen for designs on this forum usually involve stating the design is too costly and/or won't work well in some contrived scenario. There are a lot of canon designs which are costly and/or don't do that well even in realistic scenarios, much less contrived ones. Besides, if the Maus is such a clinker, then why all the uproar to the design?

If someone doesn't like a certain technology base, tonnage, player, etc, fine but that has no bearing on how effective a design is in combat
Karagin
01/28/14 06:21 AM
24.243.178.124

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Actually it does ATN, as has been pointed out in the Firedrake thread, if there is something that doesn't work very well it becomes an issues, in this case your 180 plus ton creeping target is the issue. It is too slow, has no other use then less then mobile artillery, I would dare say horse drawn cannons move faster and are more effective and the cost of building one of these things far out weighs any benefit or gain. But you don't see any of this and have made that very clear.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
01/28/14 08:22 AM
172.56.9.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Karagin sorry but no, a horse drawn carriage is not faster than ATN's failed tank.

Now comparing his tank to a tank that is from the early days of the 20th century is quite fitting. The Germans tried things like this during the latter years of The War to End All Wars aka the First World War. Their tanks where as affective as ATN's would be, in other words an easy target for artillery to shoot at.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
Retry
01/28/14 10:56 AM
72.214.204.166

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Or bombers.

Which are strangely mostly absent in the Battletech universe.

Probably because you cannot make proper defensive B-17 type turrets.
ghostrider
01/28/14 01:55 PM
66.27.181.91

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Being too slow? The behemoth tank is the same speed. I believe the annihilator mech is this slow too, but havent looked it up in over 4 years.
Yes it is slow, but other units are the same speed and pretty effective. Most are semi mobile towers.

The biggest issue with this tank is the huge cost.
Another issue is it would not be able to use normal roads or bridges to get anywhere, slowing it down even more.
The size would prevent it from being shipped in normal ships as well.
Prototype or conceptual model does work, but I seriously doubt it would ever be produced for any line of combat.
Retry
01/28/14 05:17 PM
72.214.204.166

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I don't care for the behemoth or the annihilator. At least those vehicles can traverse some terrains like bridges and rivers without a crazy heavy amphibious mod unlike the current fatty tank.

The only slug I like is one of my unposted customs Nephilidae spider tank(quad mech). It has max hardened armor and 2/2/0 movement. And only as a first drop wave mech and modest infantry anti-armor support w/ advanced EW equipment. It would be near unusable though if one did not abuse it's Void sig system+prone quad targeting mods.
ATN082268
02/04/14 01:12 AM
69.128.58.222

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Being too slow? The behemoth tank is the same speed. I believe the annihilator mech is this slow too, but havent looked it up in over 4 years.
Yes it is slow, but other units are the same speed and pretty effective. Most are semi mobile towers.

The biggest issue with this tank is the huge cost.
Another issue is it would not be able to use normal roads or bridges to get anywhere, slowing it down even more.
The size would prevent it from being shipped in normal ships as well.
Prototype or conceptual model does work, but I seriously doubt it would ever be produced for any line of combat.



Using bridges for the Maus are out but it can traverse level 1 water. Realistically it would damage roads it travels on but I don't recall seeing rules prohibiting its use of road travel. You could transport the design by Dropship anywhere on a planet or to any planet...
Retry
02/04/14 01:15 AM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Okay, so you built a tank for the purpose of... blowing up roads?

If you want it to go places why not make it a mech and get rid of the bloody extra tonnage for extra equipment?

Yeah, and what dropships have superheavy vee bays? Very, very few.
ghostrider
02/04/14 03:16 AM
66.27.181.51

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Find out the type of dropship that would carry these things and blow it out of the sky. Two expensive items for the price of one.

I was going to say only level 0 could be traverse, but the enviromental sealing might allow the deeper water. Not up on that tech.

But that would also abuse the loop hole of a unit being able to move into the next forward hex no matter its actual movement points.

Also he said damage the roads he drives on. Nothing about blowing them up.
Retry
02/04/14 03:32 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Regardless the roads won't be usable.
CrayModerator
02/04/14 06:51 PM
71.47.122.85

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
Regardless the roads won't be usable.



Only if you invoke some home rule to that effect. Bridges, on the other hand, have tonnage limits provided in, IIRC, Tactical Operations.
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.
Retry
02/04/14 07:54 PM
67.239.109.174

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I just use the rule of common sense.
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
02/04/14 10:47 PM
172.56.17.179

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
If you use that rule than heavy and assault vehicles will destroy the roads. Semis weigh less than 40 tons and they damage roads just doing every day driving on them and they have wheels and not tracks.
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.

I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
ATN082268
06/25/22 04:03 PM
166.182.81.17

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Just out of curiosity, has anyone found armored motive system and environmental sealing to be useful in their games?
Karagin
06/25/22 07:18 PM
70.118.172.64

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Nope
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)
Extra information
0 registered and 147 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: 33617


Contact Admins Sarna.net