Requiem
03/13/21 06:23 AM
1.158.229.22
|
Question – when was the lunar lander built and when is the Battletch series set – and what is the difference in the two ships technological base?
Engineering needs to be updated as technology upgrades.
Being hidebound to a particular design just because everyone else considers this the way to do it is counterproductive, in my opinion.
The Harrier was chosen to demonstrate how easy it is to divert thrust, being a VTOL fighter craft it is expected that it would be in down position – within an aerospace fighter it would have multiple thrust vectoring systems attached to the nozzles over the ship - allowing the exhaust to be deflected in any direction and therefore directing the fighter to dance in space.
Quote:
Again, you do not understand the GAMES principle of movement. You are arguing something that is outside of the game to say the game is wrong
How? Because I dream to see a different way of creating a ship? Again, is this due to me defying the status quo? … why do I feel like Galileo right now?
Quote:
You want to fix that, then BT is not the game for you I hate the fact that you can't really set up a realistic defence
Can we please keep this respectful – as this is coming close to a personal attack.
Why can’t I create my own version of the Battletech Universe?
Why can’t I say I believe that maybe a house or a periphery state may approve an aesthetically designed ship where there are nozzles all over the ship to NOT allow it to flip – to just fly straight and true?
Quote:
Changing speed is not fast in the game
I agree, however, as Cray noted above that “velocity of 3 million meters per second after 3.5 days at 1G acceleration, or about 1% of light-speed. That's 10.7 million kilometres per hour.”
At this velocity if you cannot change speed quickly one wrong move and you are going to hit something or end up spinning off to who knows where.
The computers must be spot on 100% of the time.
Quote:
Tech and availability as well as affordability isn't fairly distributed to all.
Initially this is quite true … however considering international business and how companies and countries are now utilizing the advantages offered by lower socio-economic countries this in turn is also promoting an economic resurgence to many countries – and considering the timeline is over hundreds of years you would begin to believe most of the worlds would have pulled their economic development together and over time established a viable and productive colony to that of an economic viable state …. Which has been seen in the majority of countries throughout the world.
Economic development is retarded by war, a lack of stable government and constant natural disasters …. in a period of peace, with a stable and good government, the economic development of the majority of worlds should improve.
Quote:
you will NEVER give a colony the chance to be self-sufficient. You will force them to rely on you, even if it means the die when you can-not get to them
1. Ethics;
2. It is an effective way to save over the long term by ensuring the world becomes self-sufficient – maybe even become an exporter to assist with GDP and technological development;
3. It removes illegal behaviour as when you increase wealth you decrease crime – as well as those who desire independence through a lack of assistance – dissidents vs loyalists – hence the need to station an increased military force on the world to keep it under control;
4. It promotes a belief in belonging to a government beyond the world you are on – hence loyalty to the state (which is a long-term objective);
5. Demonstrates to the wider community your commitment to look after all the people within your state – thus more people are willing to trust the wider government and the lord of the realm.
6. History – what happens when the people are tyrannized by a government far far away? Boston Tea Party … etc?
Quote:
Even if you have a full 10 seconds, it may not be enough to do anything.
Sorry, but I disagree – if the Navi computer is fast enough given the speed one small push to the side should put you a couple of hundred (plus) km away from the problem
Quote:
And not everything can be found on radar.
As noted above – Strategic Operations mentions anti-debris systems.
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
03/13/21 10:25 AM
71.47.193.139
|
Quote:
The Invader jumpship from the old dropship and jump ship book talks about the lasers being used for anti asteroid duty. As for Strategic Operations, I don't have that book, so never read thru it. How deep does it get into dealing with things in flight paths or just normal debris?
It mentions in passing how seemingly "unarmed" ships deal with debris using lightweight lasers that could hardly scorch a spacesuit. The Invader's weapons are only "anti-debris" as a euphemism for anti-pirate weapons likely to get the ship attacked rather than drive anything off (another point made in StratOps.)
Quote:
It is good to know the speed is something that isn't just pulled out of thin air. Never did the math, so was ignorant of it.
Velocity is very easy if you ever want to try it:
Velocity (in meters per second) equals acceleration (in meters per second per second) multiplied by time (in seconds)
V = A x t
Where 1G = 9.8m/s/s. Then it's all about conversions to put it in more familiar terms. There are plenty of online converters that help you turn meters per second into km/hr or miles per hour. One space hex per space turn is 300m/s.
Both ye olde DropShips & JumpShips and Strategic Operations provide the slightly heavier math for interplanetary flight. Distance incorporates a square function, which is easy enough with a calculator at hand.
Distance (in meters) = 0.5 x acceleration (m/s/s) x time (seconds) x time (seconds)
It gets a little trickier when you're doing an accelerate half-way / flip / brake half-way, but StratOps spells that math out.
Quote:
I am going to assume that is just 1g thrust. It would make sense as that is the most common thrust used in the game.
Yep. 1G is default. DropShips & JumpShips provides a table of alternate accelerations for system transit, but it's not too useful. People can't handle much more than 1.5Gs for days on end.
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
03/13/21 12:27 PM
66.74.60.165
|
The space shuttle that was used as well as all other craft that return to earth use the turn and fire the main engine to reenter the atmosphere. This is also true for the craft bringing the rovers to Mars. It is not likely to change as it is the most efficient way of doing things, in order to keep cargo weight high. An example of something close to this is some race cars do not have reverse in them. Loses some weight doing so.
The issue is to play the game the way you envision, BT is changed so dramatically, it becomes something eles. Other game systems are easier to work with. Robotech is more likely, as well as others. GURPS is probably more set up to deal with the vision.
Now that might be why the comps don't work as well as they should. To work 100% of the time, they are probably running programs that are hundreds to maybe even thousands of years old. To make something new, requires changing said programs, so even with trials, it may still not work right.
Companies do things like 'offer' to help other countries only when it comes time for taxes or to gain resources. As the world evolves, this is not happening as much. The rich just pay off the leaders to gain the resources, and the rest of the citizens of those countries lose out on the tech advances. Given the feelings of some that they should rule, they are likely to take such tech and use it against the others. Simple electric means power plants. Once people get used to using power, it is difficult for them to do it by hand.
You gain the colony's resources by charging them a higher price to import what they need. Most go to far with such tactics, as the over charge because they personally gain funds. Done right, the idea of using water purifiers and making sure the 'locals' can't work on them by retain your tech services is one way you can do this. This also means banning other ways of doing so, in order to maintain a monopoly. Same thing with shipping items to and from the colony. The morality comes from when someone gets greedy.
Also, if you do not have a way to ship items, you are reliant on things like mega corps, which are probably in league with the government, or sponsors of the colony.
There is a long history of other companies working against rivals to bring in supplies to make colonies resistant to such actions, so it isn't impossible. That is why troops get sent in, as well as companies becoming smugglers. Even those within the company that runs the colony will resort to smuggling as it tends to be more profitable then running normal supply runs.
Math might solve the dodging things issue. At 700,000 kph, that equates to over to over 11,000 kp minute. Even at 10,000 km range on your sensors, you have less then a minute to change the direction of your ship. Now this is even if the sensors or operator correctly identifies the object. This will definitely cause issues, as a single maneuvering thruster firing at the wrong milisecond will send you tumbling. Stupid, but it is a major risk. And this is saying that only one object is in the path. Maybe the developers think the front/top armor of dropships is good enough to handle it. I really don't know.
And as the game has limited speeds on how fast a ship can be moved, 100s of km is not going to happen with most ships. To turn, you have to provide enough thrust to over come the momentum.
Something sounds off with having anti debris lasers that could hardly scorch a spacesuit would suggest they don't work against things like say armor chunks or other things that isn't wood.
The Dropships and Jumpships book uses 2 (Large Lasers or PPCs) as the anti asteroid defense. A far cry from something like micro lasers. Now it may be that they are thinking the personnel are using elemental style equipment when on EVA, but a normal space suit doesn't sound like it should be a defense against them.
|
Wick
03/13/21 05:14 PM
173.247.25.195
|
Quote:
Should fighters have two engines? A normal atmospheric engine (where the speed now for basic fighter is 2,000 km/h) with a massive booster to reach a speed of 30,000 km/h to enable the craft to ascend into space.
Then there should be a second engine whilst in zero-G that allows the fighter to reach 1,400,000 to 2,100,000 km/h in order to catch any fleeing jump-ship / warship travelling at a max speed of 700,000 km/h
Atmosphere restricts ability for same engines to reach the speeds it can in outer space. The weight of air creates a tremendous amount of pressure and friction that the ship must overcome. This is analogous to trying to run while standing in the deep end of your neighborhood pool - you've got the same legs but the surrounding weight and pressure of the water is so great that you can't run as quickly.
Quote:
Physics – The concept of Relative velocity on a position-time graph in relative velocity would say otherwise.
Object A and Object B will be able to establish a position of meeting at a time of meeting – from then on a constant velocity where Va =Vb can ensure the two objects are able to move parallel to one another due to their relative velocity.
If object A has a head start, then object B has to accelerate faster to catch up. Within engagement range, object B has very little time to shoot before they zoom past object A. If object B then tries to slow down, object A will zoom past them. Either way, one of the two is blazing past the other, just as ghostrider said.
You are technically correct that there is a small window of time that they can engage, but it is exceptionally short. At 1G burn, after 3 days a craft is moving about 2.5 million meters per second (over 9 million kilometers per hour.) With an Aerotech hex size of 18,000m, that puts maximum range around 450 kilometers. So without just the right conditions (such as object B knowing object A's velocity and vector to very high precision) you'd have only 1/6th of a second to shoot. Possible? Yes. Practical? Not at all. You'd be far better off zooming ahead to the destination and waiting for the other to arrive and then engage at speeds closer to zero. Therefore, all Battletech space battle that isn't magic must take place where craft are moving relatively slowly - typically at jump points or within planetary and moon gravity wells. Any deep space combat where both craft are moving at millions of kph just isn't feasible.
Quote:
First, what happens to anything thrown of a ship moving at extreme velocity? Ans. ripped to pieces so unless you have built this mine with a massive structural integrity as well as heat resistance due to reducing in speed
Ripped to pieces from what? Heated up from what? Space is such a near vacuum that anything shot out of a craft will move almost the same speed, and there is no air friction to cause it to burn up as its velocity very, very slowly decreases. There are motes of dust and various particles (hydrogen atoms mostly) which may cause some pitting on the mine's exterior, but would take many years to eat through a sheet of metal. Battletech combat doesn't last long enough for this to play a factor.
Shooting a mine isn't the problem. Having it hit anything is the issue as the mine is exceptionally small compared to the volume of space.
Quote:
Unless you actually use engineering to redesign the ship’s super structure. This is again basic engineering where the rules of the game make no sense whatsoever …. If you can envision it you can build it.
Quote:
Why would any engineer create a space vessel whereby they need to ‘flip’ in order to change direction?
So you're going to devote weight to a spacecraft to mount redundant engages to produce a specific thrust strong enough to counteract the 1G+ main engines at the rear? Small course corrections may be possible with side mounted thrusters, but you aren't moving greatly off your vector without some mighty powerful secondary engines. It is much more cost effective to use your main engines for any significant course correction. (Only weirdos like WOB might build a ship with engines at both ends or on the sides, but that would mean its both more expensive and mounts less weaponry, less cargo space, etc. so it probably wouldn't be that popular.)
Quote:
Again one super computer + one engineering system that enables the ship to move at speed – so again not a problem.
So in addition to more engines we're also adding a super computer...
Quote:
The fuel is water
Unlikely. First because fiction indicates its a refined substance, and second because water has such a narrow operating range - only 100 C. It's too likely to either freeze (and burst its tank) or boil off.
The fusion engine may run on water but the thrust propellent is something else. Likely a hypergol.
Most automobiles have a similar two phase setup. The electrical system (battery) starts the combustion engine which is what provides motion. If the car runs out of fuel, the electrical system could still power the stereo (for a while) but short of ending on a slope the car isn't going anywhere.
Quote:
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150809-how-fast-could-humans-travel-safely-through-space
And in the final paragraph “The kind of technologies that could enable unforeseeable new transit speeds, if future physics finds out that such technology is possible,” Millis says, “would also give us new, unforeseen possibilities for protecting crews.”
This article specifically says "several hundreds of millions of kilometers per hour" - in the range of 10% speed of light or higher. At 1G burn it takes 33 days of travel to reach each hundred million kph threshold. As this is far longer than most half-transit times, Battletech craft are not as prone to highly energetic micro-impacts. At Battletech speeds (no more than 2% c) these impacts will indeed cause wear on the hull, but they won't be punching through or causing the hull to heat up to the point of melting.
Quote:
if you can work out how long it takes for a ship to achieve max velocity
I think this is your problem. You're thinking in terms of velocity, not acceleration. It is very difficult to catch up to someone accelerating away from you, and when you do, your velocity is greater than theirs so you pass them. In an automobile you can throttle up or down or let air resistance slow you to match another car, but in space this is much more difficult. Take the Gemini 6 and 7 mission for example: to rendezvous, engineers realized that it wasn't possible if both craft were in the same orbital plane: one craft had to drop to a lower altitude so its orbital energy produced greater velocity (without additional thrust) such that it could rise to meet the other craft that had built up a greater velocity over time. You're arguing for the same effect, but without the benefit of a large gravitational body to provide a slingshot action - in other words, force applied out of nowhere. (I.e., magic.)
But to answer your question requires knowing how much time has elapsed, and that gives you the velocity using the V = A x t formula Cray provided, with 9.8 meters per second per second in place of A if 1G.
|
Requiem
03/13/21 05:14 PM
1.158.229.22
|
Quote:
It is not likely to change as it is the most efficient way of doing things
As I do not have Strategic operations I do not know the rules – however would be fair to assume that …
The main issue is that all of these craft are all civilian transport carriers – What happens when the enemy holds the upper atmosphere to the re-entry vector required in order to land at a specific location and the ships need to blitzkrieg through? – what are these forces going to do turn around to break – expose their rear (with the least amount of armour and the most vulnerable part of a ship) so that they can break in order to achieve optimum velocity – so that they do not skip off the upper atmosphere like a stone thrown over the top of pond to see how many times it can skip?
At the very least there needs to be break jets along the sides in order to keep them facing forward whilst attacking through.
Then there is the issue of going through the atmosphere.
What happens if the enemy has long range surface-to- air missiles, or aerospace fighters on an attack vector bosting their way through the atmosphere on an intercept course - whist your ships are attempting to land through the atmosphere – again rear first - One good explosion damaging the vector nozzles to the rear spheroid engine and the dropship is going to be a smear on the landscape.
Quote:
they are probably running programs that are hundreds to maybe even thousands of years old.
Really ????? even during the star league? even during the darkest days as-long-as there is a computer there will also be someone who can program with it or who can hack with it … Comstar at the very least …. Then there is the issue of whole military units who are dedicated to electronic warfare now … sorry but again this is stretching reality a little too far (just with the whole loss of all technology stick) … What about basic repair of a mech / aerospace fighter / dropship / jump-ship onboard computer what about commerce – communication – the IT and entertainment industry etc?
Sorry but again I cannot see this as even a remote possibility within the universe, it is just taking things a little too far …if this was a universe wide issue then Comstar had already won and would have sent their ComGuard out to re-establish the Star League under a Blakean Theocracy - as all of the Houses would have already fallen due to technological decay.
Quote:
Companies do things like 'offer' to help other countries only when it comes time for taxes or to gain resources.
Sorry but no – International business has evolved way beyond this point – taking advantage of strategic locations, access to local markets, access to local industries / labour / tax concessions and the list goes on and on.
Many corporations now are establishing new ventures in many different countries in order to meet their long-term strategic goals ….
https://online.norwich.edu/academic-prog...obalizing-world
Business Degrees include subjects on the whole issue of Globalization - - international trade – strategies etc.
Quote:
gain the colony's resources
In my opinion this will only lead to insurrection – revolt and civil war in no time at all – and will result in either the overthrow of any legitimate government or a foreign government will use the animosity for their own nefarious ends.
Again, I would refer to my list (as noted above) as to why there needs to be a positive government long term.
Quote:
the game has limited speeds on how fast a ship can be moved
Please refer to Cray’s post – 03/12/21 - A typical 1-week transit from jump point to planet will see a flip over velocity of 3 million meters per second after 3.5 days at 1G acceleration, or about 1% of light-speed. That's 10.7 million km/h.
So what happens on the Terra run when the transit time is 9 days and theoretically some ships even go at 2G acceleration as per the books (however in reality this will just kill everyone)? and this is for ALL Dropships and Warships …. Every single ship that can relocate in system.
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.
Edited by Requiem (03/13/21 05:51 PM)
|
Requiem
03/13/21 05:47 PM
1.158.229.22
|
Quote:
If object A has a head start, then object B has to accelerate faster to catch up. Within engagement range, object B has very little time to shoot before they zoom past object A
Two vehicles on the road – car A and B – if we use the same theory above and where there is only one lane B will rear end A. This is why we have breaks on vehicles – and this is why if you design a ship with a front break system and a means of judging the distance between two objects – in this case a low intensity laser range finder that is attached to a master computer in control of the vehicle then yes you can achieve relative velocity even at these very vast speeds and with parity of speed you can engage each other (if within range) and with laser weapons who move at the speed of light.
Or can we now go back to Greek and Roman antiquity era ships with the naval ram on the front or even a massive blade that can ram the ship in front and allow for either boarding actions or slicing the front ship in two or even causing an uncontrolled spin or destroying their entire engine area which will do what to a ship travelling at massive velocity?
Can I please have a rule for a kick to the rear of a spaceship with a ship ram whist in hypervelocity.
Thus making the issue feasible.
Quote:
There are motes of dust and various particles (hydrogen atoms mostly) which may cause some pitting on the mine's exterior
And at extreme velocity what does these particles do?
Quote:
but that would mean its both more expensive and mounts less weaponry, less cargo space, etc. so it probably wouldn't be that popular.
And would allow me to achieve relative velocity and would allow me time to continue firing whist the enemy ship is engaged in a roll to reduce speed – thus providing my ship with a tactical advantage.
Quote:
So in addition to more engines we're also adding a super computer...
Yes.
Quote:
the thrust propellent
https://www.sarna.net/wiki/DropShip
The plasma exhaust is created as a by-product of nuclear fusion and requires a constant supply of fuel in the form of liquid H2
Quote:
Gemini 6 and 7
1965 Vs. how far in the future are we looking at – and how vastly different is the technology in question and how vastly different is the training and expertise of the crew?
This is science fiction set 1000 years into the future.
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
03/13/21 06:32 PM
66.74.60.165
|
If you are serious about invading the world, then a fight would take place in order to allow the ship(s) to enter the atmosphere, unless you are set on HALO dropping the units. Raids take place by landing/dropping while the space superiority battle is taking place. Now the issue comes down to forces on each side. Contesting the entry may well be a single fighter, or could be an entire regiment of fighters with dropship back up.
The thrusters used for steering is maneuvering thrusters. Breaking thrusters would suggest the can stop a ship. Given enough time it is possible for them to do so, but not any reasonable time. The maneuvering thrusters turn the ship, not stop it from going on in the direction it was in a quick time.
Now sarcasm. What if the planet has the legendary Grand Cannon from Robotech?
What do you do when they have defenses in the normal game? You either run with the drop and risk the damage, or you abort the run. When you are at a planet, your relative speed is close to zero.
And how often would be the ROM in a computer? How many times would they be replacing the hard wired coding with upgrades? There are programs run in BIOS that has not changed since computers were first built. Once an upgrade does come out, it is very unlikely that the developer will allow access to an upgrade without charging for it, as it may well become a very important part of the computer system. And with new updates, more then a few will refuse to use it as they are normally bugged. Figuring out how to steer a ship probably does not improve after a certain point.
The controls to say the laser in a CD/DVD rom will probably not change unless they get larger discs, and even then, just add to the basic program if necessary.
The 2000 bug for older systems is a good example of this. Computers made in the 80s and earlier were not programmed to deal with the year 2000. Hell. Some items made in the late 90's were not set up for 2000 and beyond.
Read the statements.
Companies do things like 'offer' to help other countries only when it comes time for taxes or to gain resources.
Sorry but no – International business has evolved way beyond this point – taking advantage of strategic locations, access to local markets, access to local industries / labour / tax concessions and the list goes on and on.
Does both of these statements not say the same thing?
How long did monarchies and such last? They had rebellions, but yet it was only mass communications that allowed such rebellions to finally throw off the ability for self sustaining colonies. When you control the ability to get necessary items to a place, they are NOT going to revolt unless there is an alternative. Only when you get greedy do they really push.
Actually, you may want to check out Spell Jammers from D&D for the rear ram of a ship. Speed is the key to how much damage you could do to another.
But you will take damage yourself for doing the ram, and the thrust of the ship you are trying to hit, will not be in the damage returned to the ramming ship.
What does the dust motes do to the ship as it flies thru them? I could very well suggest that most of those motes are removed from the dropships passage, if the items are shoved out of the rear of the ship. Engine thrust would be the main threat at that point.
What good is matching speeds with another ship, when you don't have the weapons and armor to beat it? You just wasted the funds on a ship that would be destroyed by others. This is why deep space interception isn't feasible.
And yet the game specifically states that flipping a ship is the normal means of steering it at speeds. Again, canon logic needs to beat canon material.
Presenting facts that are not in the game, is removing the game from being the game. You want breaks, but don't want the ships to slide anytime they turn. Cherrypicking things so you don't have to deal with the full issues? Spend your weight and money creating a system that can do what you want, but remember. You will have to change the way and how much damage your ship receives for the sudden thrust on the internal structure. Apply force to one location will cause the black hole effect on it. It changes the inertial force at the point of the thrusters, but have to fight the inertia at all the rest of the ship. More weight for reinforcing the structure comes to mind, but that does not eliminate it.
|
Requiem
03/13/21 07:46 PM
1.158.229.22
|
Quote:
then a fight would take place in order to allow the ship(s) to enter the atmosphere
I did make appoint this was a blitzkrieg action to a specific location upon a planet – ie. reinforcements required upon a battlefield and its time sensitive …
Thus, you have no real option but to flip and make a run for it … remember both sides have naval personnel who understand when and where these forces will need to flip so they can pretty much anticipate any action by a fellow naval commander.
This is just an extension of an area denial tactic and all sarcasm aside missiles have been used since the Napoleonic Wars … with interception missiles since the cold war … so there is a real threat that it can be used.
Quote:
And how often would be the ROM in a computer?
How often are computers within military and civilian craft upgraded? Every 5,10, 20, 30 years and then there are expert technicians for the job who have run the new equipment so there are no bugs.
Also how often is new personal computer hardware / software be upgraded now? Every six- moths or so and 1000 years into the future?
Also CD/DVD rom would be obsolete …
I would also like to point out that during the Y2K incident nothing at all occurred to any computer where I was at the time, the issue was non-existent …
As for Globalization – I would suggest you should take a business course to understand the massive number of positives for corporations when entering into business arrangements within foreign countries.
As for revolts – the setting is 1,000 years in the future – so yes they do have communications – yes they do have access to advanced weapon systems from either arms merchants or foreign governments wanting to stir up trouble.
Quote:
Spell Jammers from D&D
Have a look at some of the ships within the anime Glass Fleet – those with massive knives on the prow as well as the main ship in the series – the ram itself comes back to construction materials and engineering techniques as well as its overall design.
Thus it is quite realistic to say that given a decent engineer as well as a decent manufacturer there will be nil damage to the ramming ship.
Though the real question is what is the damage inflicted – if you can destroy the complete vector nozzles on the rear our ability to move reduces to nil. Thus turning the ship in question into an easy target – especially if you take out the whole engine area – only battery power left to run the ship once captured.
Thus I have now created a new class of warship the Interceptor class designed specifically for extreme velocity combat
All that is required now is to add new rules to the construction rules … re. front and rear drive plumes / battering ram knives / advanced sensors / advanced computer attack systems
Then there needs to be rules re physical attacks at hyper velocity – difference in vessel mass ie warship to dropship / damage location / capital damage and critical damage / what happens to a ship due to the damage inflicted.
A greyhound with Twin drive plumes front and rear – massive ram knife – with a massive number of large naval lasers on turrets as well a massive number of fighters and marines with shuttles for boarding action.
Fist to use this will have a massive tactical advantage over all other fleets – this is a new Dreadnaught Class Warship Moment within the Battletech universe!
A ship specifically designed to hunt down other ships whist travelling at hyper velocity – a new greyhound warship!
Thus you do have the weapons and armour to beat it – it all comes down to construction rules when implemented.
Quote:
And yet the game specifically states that flipping a ship is the normal means of steering it at speeds. Again, canon logic needs to beat canon material.
Just because the rules state it does not mean it have to be followed forever – with new technology comes new rules of war.
Quote:
Presenting facts that are not in the game, is removing the game from being the game.
What happens when new weapons are introduced does this automatically change the game – when the omni was first introduced did this kill the game – when warships were re-introduced into the game did this kill the game?
Sorry but changing the specifics does not change / kill off the game – it enhances and improves the game or do you only fight with pre 3050 mechs and weapon systems and completely ignore every other advanced weapon system because they were not in the first edition box.
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.
|
Wick
03/13/21 07:49 PM
173.247.25.195
|
Space brakes? First of all, that's physically ridiculous. As has already been pointed out, a car slows down because less throttle is put into forward motion, while friction from the road against tires and atmosphere against shape causes drag. While you can throttle down your space engine, there's not an appreciable amount of drag to slow down in space. The Voyager spacecraft are moving much, much slower than Battletech spacecraft and won't slow down to near stationary relative velocity for millennia.
Secondly, space brakes aren't needed because a deep space ram is next to impossible. If two craft are heading toward or away from a planet, regardless of speed, unless they leave at practically the same time they won't have even close to the same vector to destination. If craft B leaves Earth's orbit an hour after craft A, B is starting 108,000 kilometers further along in Earth's orbit. This is 240 times the maximum weapon range. So assuming both craft are taking straight lines to jump point, they aren't coming within weapon range again until the final 0.4% of the trip, or the final 55 minutes of a 9.12 day trip.
And I'm sure you're thinking, well craft B will just burn quickly to object A's origin, and then burn fast enough to catch up to it along the same vector. With no suitable point of reference It's virtually impossible they'll line up perfectly to ram the other ship in transit due to the vast volume of space, but I'll give you the benefit of doubt on getting close enough to fire. At 1G this would take craft B three hours of time to reach craft A's origin so craft A is now four hours ahead; i.e. Craft A has 215 hours remaining to reach jump point at 1G and while craft B still has the full 219 and is at zero velocity. To reach joint point in the same period of time craft B must burn at 1.0186G (219 divided by 215). Certainly possible. In deep space, Craft B would pass craft A two hours after A flipped over, or with 107.5 hours (or 387,000s) remaining in burn time for both craft. Craft A is therefore moving 3,792,600 m/s and craft B is moving 3,863,160 m/s - both are decelerating but at different rates. In other words, craft B is moving 70 kilometers per second faster, giving about 6.3 seconds of the two craft being within 450 kilometers and able to fire at each other. That's a terribly small window of time. If craft B is burning greater than 1.0186G then they'll blow past craft A at an even faster velocity with even less of a window to fire. If craft B decelerates to less than 1.0186G as they near craft A, then they might open the window for a second or two longer, before craft A zooms out of range and then craft B is playing catch up again - an act that requires flipping over a second time, accelerating up, then flipping over a third time to slow down to engage the continually decelerating craft A again.
I'm sure your next option is for craft B to decelerate harder to better match craft A's velocity, which is possible, but what stops craft A from decelerating harder itself, or flipping over to accelerate up, or even changing vector a fraction of a degree? This cat and mouse game could continue until both craft were forced to slow down and meet as they got nearer and nearer the jump point, ultimately becoming a slow speed engagement at a specific location, not a deep space transit battle.
So face it, physics combined with the relatively short weaponry range in Battletech combines to make it impractical to hunt down another ship and have a deep space battle during transit because the window for opportunity only lasts for a few seconds. To make deep space battle viable, Battletech needs weapons with much greater range than 450km or craft that can magically perform banking maneuvers without atmosphere (ala Star Wars and Star Trek) to change vector without loss of acceleration. The only certainty in the whole concept is that both craft must end up at the same location (jump point or planet), regardless of vector(s) taken or acceleration rate(s). So the proper plan is for craft B to race to the destination, be there when craft A arrives and then blast it at leisure when both are moving at only a few hundred or thousand kph rather than several million.
Physics from 1965 are going to be the same as physics in the 31st century and the mathematics illustrating these points will not change.
If you want to design funny assault dropships with multiple engines to open that few seconds window up to a minute or longer, you can do that, but it adds cost and reduces weapon/armor capacity compared to similar weight single engines designs that just burn faster and wait for you at the destination. The standard form of warship and dropship (assault or not) with main engines at the stern performing a flip-over at the midpoint is both the most cost effective and battle-worthy design.
|
ghostrider
03/13/21 09:52 PM
66.74.60.165
|
BIOS in the chip that runs the computer. It uses most of the coding used in the first computer. There have been updates to it, as systems got faster, larger memory, as well as dealing with more peripheries. But some of the basic coding has not changed.
How much do you know about hard drives in a computer? They use the same principle as the CD rom does to access information within it. Multiple small disks are there that store information. That is yet another set of coding that doesn't change all that much. How to rotate a radar dish is not going to be upgraded. The coding to tell a nuke reactor to open or close a cooling valve is not going to change. The coding for figuring out coords you need to jump to isn't going to change. But this seems to be something that won't connect in your thoughts.
If 1000 people live in a city, and 999 of them like the conditions going on, one person tries to change this is going to get nailed to the wall. Even 50 would be nailed to the wall. Global business right now is not as nice as you believe. They don't do a lot of their nice deeds because the want to be nice. They do it because they have so much competition, and the laws of nations will take them out if they don't. But that is in the free market. In something like supplying a colony, you get very limited in what you can buy, and whom you can purchase from. And with this, you tend to sign a contract with the sponsor that locks this in. Until something horrible happens, like people start to starve, you do anything to violate that, and you get sued. The illusion that you can do otherwise comes crashing down when you step on the toes of the big boys.
I don't bother with anime. The ships you are referring to are not known to me. But if you want to try the melee style ships, that is your choice. Don't try and call it BT. It isn't.
The idea of ships trying a charge, which mechs do but the attacker takes damage as well as the defender, is going to happen with the ships. You can not hope to crash a ship into another and receive no damage. To try and make it otherwise, is creating a logic hole.
And with the physical only combat ships, you would hope the enemy can't take you out before you can strike or is faster.
Until you become one of the staff that develops the game, house rules are NOT canon. By demanding they are, is where disagreements come into effect. Trying to hide behind the 'presenting an alternative view' doesn't change this fact. Arguing they have to change it to that vision negates the dodge.
Wick, if you read the initial response, which seems Requiem has ignored, this all started with two ships with the same speed. I guess not stating both ships would be flying at max speed makes the idea of catching someone seem possible. Thinking the front one is just going on a sunday drive seems to be the concept for another to catch up and match the speed.
As for further information, it seems that magical items like energy shields and turbo thrust will allow ships to do things that they don't do now is the defense coming up.
Interesting thought just came up. The argument suggests anything fires or released at this speed would burn up, yet ballistic and missiles would fall into this category, meaning the idea of fire exchanges would not be able to include them. I know they don't burn up as the lack of friction doesn't allow it, but being hit by some micro debris is possible. Jettisoning things out the back side should be clear of anything in the path of direction the ship is flying.
This statement ends the funny design thing: What good is matching speeds with another ship, when you don't have the weapons and armor to beat it? You just wasted the funds on a ship that would be destroyed by others. This is why deep space interception isn't feasible.
|
Requiem
03/14/21 12:56 AM
1.158.229.22
|
When the driver presses down on the accelerator pedal the car accelerates
When the driver presses down on the brake pedal the car decelerates
When the computer uses the rear engine only the ship accelerates
When the computer turns off the rear engine, engaging the front engine the ship decelerates.
Why is this so physically ridiculous – that you do not have to flip the ship any more to decelerate.
For me flipping the ship is the act of being ridiculous.
Quote:
a deep space ram is next to impossible. If two craft are heading toward or away from a planet, regardless of speed, unless they leave at practically the same time they won't have even close to the same vector to destination.
Please explain the Strategic Defence Initiative – aka star wars Extended Range Interceptor (ERINIT) – Homing Overlay Experiment (HOE) – Brilliant Pebbles and who knows what else
Even 500 years into the future who knows what is and what is not viable.
If patriot missiles work now then why cant two ships meet in space over greater distances and greater speeds?
If one has a greater acceleration than the other I do not see the problem as long as the craft has the active probe hardware and software necessary to complete the task. Given the velocity Cray has noted then the idea that any drop-ship has the capability to move at such speed and with such precision there is little to no doubt that it is possible. And given the fact that everyone keeps stating that the rear ship will overtake the front ship, firing off a shot if its lucky, then the idea that the two can strike each other is also a certainty.
Question – during some planetary invasions you could end up with dozens of dropships correct? – so how does all of these ships stay together over vast distances from the Nadir / Zenith point all the way to the planet in question without bumping into each other - they all stay in their own spot.
So how hard is it when you take this into account that a ship cannot intercept this group?
Quote:
And I'm sure you're thinking, well craft B will just burn quickly to object A's origin
The phase – plotting an intercept course? Same here the computer should be able to predict an adequate intercept course given all the variables and should be able to amend them if they change – if a patriot can do it not then in 500-1000 years time this should also not pose a problem.
Quote:
So face it, physics combined with the relatively short weaponry range in Battletech combines to make it impractical to hunt down another ship and have a deep space battle during transit because the window for opportunity only lasts for a few seconds.
Who has the fastest F-1 race car? This is what is all about who has the fastest ship equipped with a battering ram.
Remember many ships travel in packs so the guns to finish it off once its engine have been destroyed could be on another ship – the whole idea is to cripple the ship forcing it out of extreme velocity and in so doing make it a target for the bigger guns that are on the way with a secondary intercept course.
Quote:
So the proper plan is for craft B to race to the destination, be there when craft A arrives
WW2 bombers – how would that plan work – be there for Berlin or London and do not even care for them whist they are on their way? This means that their racks are full and they can drop their bombs whilst the forces are trying to defeat them over the city – damage still done.
Dropships still released – orbital bombardment still under way – damage still being done if you allow them close to the planet!
If a weapon can be built that can kick them out of extreme velocity – you initiate area deniability to the enemy – you keep them a great distance from their objective – you shift the battle to a place and time of your choosing not the enemies!
Quote:
If you want to design funny assault dropships
Mass is not there as well as speed – think frigate with the largest supercharged engine available! You will need the mass behind you when you impale the enemy to cause maximum damage! Plus all dropship classes would virtually rip in two.
Plus the engine now does not need to be in the stern – it can be in the centre!
Quote:
If 1000 people live in a city, and 999 of them like the conditions going on, one person tries to change this is going to get nailed to the wall.
Galileo in 1633 – heresy - Still does not change the fact he was correct!
How many other individuals have been pointed out they were wrong only to be validated in the future?
Quote:
I don't bother with anime. The ships you are referring to are not known to me. But if you want to try the melee style ships, that is your choice. Don't try and call it BT. It isn't.
The show the Expanse brings out that point very well.
unless you are set on HALO dropping the units
check out Spell Jammers from D&D
Quote:
By demanding they are, is where disagreements come into effect.
This ship is for me and those like me who want to create such a vessel …
Quote:
Thinking the front one is just going on a Sunday drive seems to be the concept for another to catch up and match the speed.
This is why I suggested building a F-1 ship that enables it with the ability to determine a viable intercept course and attack; if not it can always send a warning as well as an eta …
Quote:
You can not hope to crash a ship into another and receive no damage.
A couple of years back during an earthquake buildings would topple to the ground – today they are built in such a way as they sway with the earthquake ….
Also the height of buildings has increased vastly with the introduction of methods to keep the building from swaying
What was once impossible is now possible – case in point the Pyramids …. Humanity has a way of crating the possible from the impossible.
Throwing things out the back at high velocity – will they stay on course or will they travel in an undetermined path? Also can a ship proceed to intercept another ship an oblique angle ie proceed up to the ship in a parallel course and at the last moment change direction to “stab” the enemies ship engine causing a massive tare through the rear superstructure and engine?
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
03/14/21 03:04 AM
66.74.60.165
|
The problem, as said before, is the game of Battletech, does NOT have powerful thrusters in the front to slow the ship down at any real speed. The maneuvering thrusters don't exert that much force, which is why it takes so long to dock.
We are not arguing what is possible in the future, we are tell you what the game says is possible. Some how, that fact is not registering. BT has their rule set and until the developers change it, which might be in 5 minutes on up to never, saying it has to be your way, will not work. You want BT, but don't want BT. Alt rules is fine for home games, but the consistent saying canon has to follow home rules is the issue here. It has been for a long while. Again. BT facts verse BT facts. Saying this or that is done in other games doesn't cut it.
Who has the fastest F-1 race car? This is what is all about who has the fastest ship equipped with a battering ram.
Remember many ships travel in packs so the guns to finish it off once its engine have been destroyed could be on another ship – the whole idea is to cripple the ship forcing it out of extreme velocity and in so doing make it a target for the bigger guns that are on the way with a secondary intercept course.
So now friction in space is soo great that you can draft another ship then pull around it? The second part is suggesting you can just shoot an engine or something and stop a ship from continuing on at it's current speed from inertia? And you suggest realism? The ship without power will eventually leave the star system at the speed equal to it's last speed, unless it hits something or is affected by a gravity field. And that gravity field may actually increase the speed, not stop it. Slingshot around worlds is a reality. The probes sent out from earth have done so in the past.
The WWII example doesn't work. To find incoming aircraft you needed radar, which was only invented during that time. The normal way of finding them is having them spotted on the coast and called in to command to scramble the fighters. SO engaging them over water wasn't likely at all. It is possible a ship was able to call it in, but that would be very rare.
Super chargers do not work in space. The thrust put out of a ship only allows so much push on the ship. This is why there is a top accelerator speed on ships. The thrust can not go above that. Now having a ship that the engine revolves around the ship sounds like it would work, but the stress created would mean every single point on the ship would have to be reinforced instead of the main way a normal single plane thrust ship does. So lose weight for weapons, armor and other things.
If it was worth having side thrust on things, missiles today would have some to fire just as the missile gets near it's target. No chance for the target to dodge. But the extra weight isn't worth the costs for the most part.
How many got the city to follow them with their right answers? If the masses don't object to conditions, then the revolution doesn't happen. A mob takes out the troublemaker. Right or wrong, that is how it was done. The future will continue that sentiment.
The show the Expanse brings out that point very well.
unless you are set on HALO dropping the units
check out Spell Jammers from D&D
It was never said these are BT. They are used to provide context to what is being said. The D&D reference was made to give you some sort of basis if you really wanted to figure out damage done rear ending a ship with the speed difference. The Expanse is to show why BT has an issue with stopping quickly. The idea that you can stop on a dime without reverse thrust seems to run very high, yet the game itself does not say it can be done.
Still not getting the idea that demanding your house rules become canon for everyone else to have to follow is where the issue is at?
The only real way to intercept a moving ship and get to match speed is by using a faster ship. The argument was set up that two ships with the same speed could not do so if one was trying to avoid combat. It is a simple statement. The implied concept was a second ship being slower would never catch the first, and a faster ship would catch it. Not sure why this is so hard to conceive.
An Achilles would be able to catch an Overlord without too much problems, unless it is already at the turn around point. Two Overlords would mean a stalemate.
And saying that you can intercept an Overlord with an Overlord and match it, doesn't work. The first one would have the speed going, while the other one would have to lose ground trying to get close enough, then burn to match the direction of the first. You are just not going to be able to provide the thrust to do that. Same speed.
|
ghostrider
03/14/21 04:43 AM
66.74.60.165
|
I should have figured this out earlier about why it is highly stupid to NOT flip over for the long burn to slow down.
The term Red Out in fighter jets will explain it.
I will explain it tomarrow, but want to see if anyone can figure it out before then.
|
Requiem
03/14/21 04:52 AM
1.158.229.22
|
Quote:
we are telling you what the game says is possible … saying it has to be your way …
Problem is … as I wrote above … this ship is for me and those like me who want to create such a vessel.
This is clearly stating it is for my home rules and for others who may want to adopt such rules, it IN NO WAY endorses that fact that BT should immediately endorse my idea as canon.
Quote:
So now friction in space is soo great that you can draft another ship then pull around it
A Naval squadron / fleet does include more than one warship – each with its own role to play.
The interceptors are designed to kill an enemies’ drive plume – hence kicking them out of extreme velocity – the ship will then communicate its location whereby the remaining ‘normal’ warships will be able to congregate and either destroy or capture the hulk – and any remnants of the crew / salvage.
ie. Normal SOP.
Quote:
The ship without power will eventually leave the star system at the speed equal to its last speed
Isn’t this obvious?
Unless my interceptor forces the ship to slow down by either impaling it a second time and slowing it down with their breaking-system or it is impaled from the first strike – killing the engine – and thus they slow the ship down with their engines. Or they calculate the trajectory of the ship and allow it to strike into the nearby uninhabited world – that could even be thought of a navigational error by anyone looking for their lost ship, not realizing that their enemy has a new warship class.
Quote:
The WWII example does not work
Research would have helped here – Robert Watson-Watt and other British scientists invented radar in the years leading up to WWII.
Refer:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain_(film)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castles_in_the_Sky_(film)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_in_World_War_II
Have a look at the map within for the Chain Home Coverage for September 1939 and 1940.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air-sea_rescue#Britain_2
which included the quote, “… by the end of 1943 Coastal Command has rescued 1,684 aircrew out of 5,466 presumed to have ditched in the sea …”
so how many battles were fought over the sea – thus proving the strategy of area deniability to the enemy – to keep them at a great distance from their objective – they shifted the battle and in so doing reduced the damage to their airfields and their cities – and to a place and time of their choosing.
And in so doing the German Luftwaffe changed tactics to night bombing …
Quote:
Supercharges do not work in space
This is a home rule project.
Quote:
it was never said these are BT. They were used to provide context to what is being said
And Glass fleet is not context?
Quote:
Still not getting the idea that demanding your house rules become canon for everyone else to have to follow is where the issue is at?
As stated previously – this is for those who want to adopt it into their game.
Quote:
It is a simple statement
Ship classes have different velocity / acceleration - even when operating at an extreme velocity - thus one ship will have the edge over the other, this will be based upon their current MP to indicate the overall efficiency of each vessel.
The point is I am not using an existing design as they do not have twin drive plumes – comparison can only be made with something new … and as stated before I will be using in likelihood a frigate type design – yet with an even larger engine and with a booster system, more efficient active probe, and AI computer system etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-LOC
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
03/14/21 09:42 AM
71.47.193.139
|
Quote:
Should fighters have two engines? A normal atmospheric engine (where the speed now for basic fighter is 2,000 km/h) with a massive booster to reach a speed of 30,000 km/h to enable the craft to ascend into space.
BattleTech's aerospace fighters already have "massive boosters" in the form of their normal fusion engine. A "sluggish" 5/8 aerospace fighter can accelerate at 4Gs, which is higher acceleration than any operating crewed, spacecraft in the 21st Century. The shuttle got off the ground at 1.2Gs and peaked at 3Gs before booster separation and main engine cut off. Aerospace fighters also have vastly better fuel efficiency than chemical rockets so, per the Total Warfare rules, it only takes a ton of fuel to reach orbit (and that's wasting a lot of fuel considering that orbital velocity is about 26 hexes per turn).
Also, you don't need to be moving 30,000km/hr to "ascend into space." The V-2 was the first manmade object into space (1944, 176km altitude) and it was traveling far slower than orbital velocity. You need to be moving at 28,000 km/hr to enter a stable, low orbit over Earth rather than, say, falling on London. Orbital velocity will vary depending on the local planet's mass and your distance from its core. BattleTech's low orbit gravity rules cover the need for sufficient velocity to stay in orbit.
Quote:
Then when converting this to MP velocity becomes a very interesting question?
1 space hex (18km) per space turn (60 seconds) is 300m/s.
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
03/14/21 09:47 AM
71.47.193.139
|
Quote:
Changing speed is not fast in the game. As the lack of significant thrust in any direction besides forward is why the ship has to rotate to turn or slow. And you can only spend so much thrust to affect the ship. your 700,000 kph is affects by what per turn? 4/6 ship can only slow down as much as the 6 thrust can do.
6 thrust is a credible 3G, more than any real fighter plane can pull in straight line acceleration. 3Gs allows a 1-kilometer WarShip to flip end-over-end (3 thrust points) in less than a turn and then shed 700,000 km/hr (194,444m/s) in 1.8 hours.
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
03/14/21 09:57 AM
71.47.193.139
|
Quote:
Space brakes? First of all, that's physically ridiculous. As has already been pointed out, a car slows down because less throttle is put into forward motion, while friction from the road against tires and atmosphere against shape causes drag. While you can throttle down your space engine, there's not an appreciable amount of drag to slow down in space.
Yep. In BattleTech, which follows Newtonian mechanics in space, you have to use your main engines to slow down.
Quote:
The Voyager spacecraft are moving much, much slower than Battletech spacecraft and won't slow down to near stationary relative velocity for millennia.
They won't slow down much at all. They're above Sol's escape velocity.
Quote:
To make deep space battle viable, Battletech needs weapons with much greater range than 450km or craft that can magically perform banking maneuvers without atmosphere (ala Star Wars and Star Trek) to change vector without loss of acceleration.
BattleTech's spacecraft don't slow down when they change their vectors unless they deliberately thrust against their original heading. See: advanced aerospace movement rules in Strategic Operations. If you're using those movement rules then the behavior is very realistic.
Quote:
If you want to design funny assault dropships with multiple engines to open that few seconds window up to a minute or longer
Just flip and burn to slow down and open the attack window a fraction of a second. A good assault DropShip has thrust points to spare. The Expanse has numerous excellent examples of BattleTech-style combat maneuvering.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RptEkwG86v0
Also, the high speed closing engagements rules in Strategic Operations addresses all these issues - it summarizes maneuvers and counter-maneuvers for interception and avoiding it, and then plays out milli-seconds of combat in one set of rolls.
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
03/14/21 01:50 PM
66.74.60.165
|
Taking out the engines on a vehicle going 700,000 kph means the craft can not continue to accelerate. It seems you forget space is not touching ground or in atmospheres where friction slows you down. I said it before and will repeat it. The ship will stay at the speed, extreme in this case, until it hits something or gets caught up in a gravity well. Getting in front of it and slowing it down is possible as well. But on it's own, taking out the engines WILL NOT stop it.
This statement suggested you didn't understand that: Isn’t this obvious?
As this discussion is still running the two ships at the same speed, the idea of squadrons isn't in it. The whole argument is that two ships with the same speed can not have the rear one catch up and pace the front one if they are both moving full out. This is a fact of life.
The numbers of those ditching their planes at sea include those damaged in battle and trying to get home, only to find out they won't make it. Also those that ran out of fuel. So the numbers are much lower then you want them to sound like.
Now it is time to shut down the reverse thruster issue.
The term Red Out for those that don't know it, means the exact opposite of a pilot black out. Outside turns can cause this, meaning the pilots head is on the outer edge of the turn, instead of their feet. The blood, instead of going to the feet of the pilot, rushing into the head. This stress is far more dangerous then a black out and requires less g-force to activate. There are no bladders to fill with air to squeeze the blood back out like the feet and legs of a flight suit.
Ships are designed so down is towards gravity on a planet. This means the transit drive on ships. When flying, your feet and butt are set so down in towards the engines. This is something discussed in the bridge thread. It is true even outside of that thread. This is for long range transportation, fighter craft don't follow this, since their thrust is set to push you back into a seat.
Corridors of a craft are larger then normal, meaning at least 8 foot tall with some bridges being 12 or more.
In flight, not everyone is belted into their seats. But being belted doesn't mean you are out of danger.
When you stop thrust from below your feet, you tend to experience a lack of gravity, even though you are traveling the 700,000 kph. Now you fire the reverse thrusters and what happens? Those not belted in impact on the ceiling, which is now the floor as the thrust is from the bow of the ship.
The Red Out effect comes into play as those belted in, now have the blood rush to their heads.
Now with this, you are suggesting that for the next 3plus days, you will have this happening to everyone belted in. This is why flipping the ship is not going to change without artificial gravity.
And now for more issues. As those belted in are now actually upsidedown on the ceiling, the ability to get in and out of the chairs becomes an issue, much less trying to do anything like work with the controls. And no matter what you think, you are NOT going to be seated the entire 3 plus days upside down. Simple things like eating and drinking, as well as using the bathroom will happen, become a major issue. The main one is the blood flow into your skull.
And not all crew would be belted in, as some things have to be done while the ship is moving. Any thing that needs to be repaired, has to be done, no matter if the ship is on a flat course or dodging shot.
So the concept of keeping the main thrust at your 'feet' is going to stay like that.
|
Wick
03/14/21 02:16 PM
173.247.25.195
|
Quote:
Please explain the Strategic Defence Initiative – aka star wars Extended Range Interceptor (ERINIT) – Homing Overlay Experiment (HOE) – Brilliant Pebbles and who knows what else
Quote:
if a patriot can do it
Quote:
the fastest F-1 race car
Quote:
WW2 bombers
None of these are moving millions of kph. Stop referencing slow-speed interceptions that have absolutely no bearing on high-speed encounters. You sound like a fool when you keep saying things that are possible at a few hundred kph and distances of a few hundred or thousand kilometers are just as possible at several million kph and hundreds of millions of kilometers. I'll give you good odds to hit a dartboard with a dart from ten feet away, taking one step to the side as you do it. I wouldn't give you any odds to hit a dartboard ten million miles away while moving a million kph in any direction even if you could throw it that distance. Stop saying you can based on the closer, slower example.
Quote:
When the computer turns off the rear engine, engaging the front engine the ship decelerates.
Why is this so physically ridiculous – that you do not have to flip the ship any more to decelerate.
For me flipping the ship is the act of being ridiculous.
If you have similar engine ratings in both front and back and your center of mass is directly between the two engines, then you're right. Why you'd invest the money in it and take up valuable space in your ship is the problem. Not to mention with engines on either end the craft is no longer aerodynamic or bottom-heavy so landing on planets becomes more difficult, but if it was a space-only dropship (like the Argo) this wouldn't matter. No one's saying it can't be made; we're saying that 99% of the time its not as practical as a conventional rear-engined dropship. Pocket warships are about the only practical application I can think of where the added cost, dismissal of routine landing capability, and warfare benefits outweigh other factors. If I was operating a cargo or transport dropship (which are the vast majority), I'd want cheapest base cost, cheapest operating cost, the largest cargo/transport capacity available, with beds, chairs, and tables affixed to one bulkhead and not two, and the ability to land more easily - all of which come with the models in which engines are mounted on one end with an aerodyne or egg/sphere shape. Yes I have to flipover halfway between each cruise, but I'm getting there just as fast with more cargo or mechs in tow at cheaper cost. If two engines was the way to go, we'd have designed Vostok, Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Soyuz, the Space Shuttle, Dragon, and all interplanetary missions that way, and be designing Orion that way now. (Just watch the Apollo 13 movie if you want to see how difficult using a second engine with an off-center balance point can be if you think its still the better idea.)
To be honest, if you want maximum battle capability, you'd mount six identical engines, one to each side of a cube, like Larry Niven describes in Ringworld's Children. Those craft can move in any direction and can always be facing their enemy without the need to reorient to point engines in a certain direction to adjust their heading. Aside from the very high cost of mounting six engines, a cubic dropship or fighter probably wouldn't appeal to Battletech players so I doubt we'll be seeing it anytime soon.
Quote:
Question – during some planetary invasions you could end up with dozens of dropships correct? – so how does all of these ships stay together over vast distances from the Nadir / Zenith point all the way to the planet in question without bumping into each other - they all stay in their own spot.
Space is many times greater in volume than the combined dropship fleet. And given these are friendly craft to each other, if another was getting too close maneuvering jets could be used to adjust heading by a tiny fraction of degree to avoid a collision (though they are generally in parallel and shouldn't need to.) Could an enemy craft ram another? Sure. At slow speeds (jump points and gravity wells) this shouldn't be too difficult. But in deep space its akin to hitting a bullet with another bullet fired a second later from an inch to the side: the chance the second bullet hits the first is very remote. Now scale it up to sizes and volumes a couple of million times larger and the chance is effectively zero.
Quote:
The Expanse has numerous excellent examples of BattleTech-style combat maneuvering.
Yeah I've seen Expanse. It has great realism in its space battles, but I don't think they ever do combat at speeds attained after constant 1G burns of several days. They are having relatively slow speed battles in which the two craft are moving relative to each other by a difference of a few hundred or thousand kph. I'm not sure they ever reach millions of kph in the show - as I recall they'd typically burn up for a few hours then coast, and do a flipover and reverse burn to slow down, but they aren't carrying enough fuel to burn continuously like in Battletech.
Expanse says a normal transit from Earth to Saturn is several weeks, but a Battletech dropship can do it in about 6 days at 1G, so clearly most craft in Expanse universe are not burning 1G continuously. Furthermore, Rocinante spent 11 hours burning at 5G to escape the Donnager - probably its maximum thrust for maximum intended duration (or even a little past recommended endurance.) This put its velocity at end of burn at 388,080 m/s or about 1.4 million kph - only about 1/7th the speed of a Battletech dropship at 1G at flipover from Earth.
But Expanse closely matches what Battletech would do near jump points or planets.
Quote:
Just flip and burn to slow down and open the attack window a fraction of a second. A good assault DropShip has thrust points to spare.
But as I've said this is surprisingly hard when you're moving that fast. Let's say you need about 9 turns to complete a battle. With a 450km range window, that means you have to match the other ship's speed to within 50kph. If the target craft is moving 10 million kph, this means nailing a velocity range that is 0.0005% wide. Are your engines sensitive enough to get it right the first time, every time? Don't know about you, but I'm taking the sure thing and waiting for them to arrive at the jump point or planet rather than that 1 in 200,000 chance of matching speeds perfectly enough for a proper battle.
And all that assumes counting on the other ship to not slow down further, flipover and speed up, or adjust its heading a small amount. Ensuring a 450km lateral distance in ten minutes at 10 million kph is less than a five millionths of a degree change ( tan(450km/1000000kph * 10min/60min/hr) ) - which should be well within the capabilities of orientation jets. It doesn't matter if the assault dropship has thrust to spare, at these speeds the target has too many tricks up its sleeve and can employ delaying tactics to counter the persuer - at least until it gets nearer the jump point and they've both decelerated to the point that the fox can overcome the rabbit's tricks.
|
Requiem
03/14/21 06:24 PM
1.158.229.22
|
Quote:
This statement suggested you didn't understand that: Isn’t this obvious?
As stated above – impale the ship then use the engines to arrest the speed of the now damaged ship – comprehension: is clear using one ship to decelerate the’ falling’ mass to zero velocity.
Quote:
the idea of squadrons isn't in it.
Really?
Quote:
So the numbers are much lower then you want them to sound like.
Still does not change the fact that area deniability via the use of Radar was occurring to preserve bases / cities from attack.
Proving the soundness of the strategy – whereby you use a ship to hunt down invading forces within extreme velocity - to ensure fleet does not reach the target word is sound.
Plus it sound like it would be fun!
And if these ships had existed for centuries then pirates could have them – thus creating a whole new possible story arc to the game.
Quote:
Red out
Occur when the body experiences a negative g-force. Question – in space within the central point (axis)?
Plus wouldn’t every ship have an internal ‘chairs’ that acts like a gyroscope to that the people do not feel the effects of negative g-forces? Remember these ships have been flipping for centuries wouldn’t someone come up with a means to ensure this does not happen otherwise the death toll could be very high for every roll – also some families have existed in space for a very long time how do they survive?
Quote:
This is why flipping the ship is not going to change without artificial gravity.
If the ship was being attacked wouldn’t everyone be at their ready reaction points or safe muster points – which would be belted down at a console / gun platform / or within one of the life rafts?
As for military ships – they are attacking a military ship – so the point is? We cant attack because we might hurt someone? Ships have been flipping etc for centuries and no one has come up with a means of combating this?
As for the attacking ship they too would have a means of combating any negative effects ….
One more point if these negative effects had never been fixed then there would never have been a first exodus form Terra to begin with – or if there was the rate of expansion would be way lower than that given as the time to reach any world from the Nadir / zenith is now in months / years – not days. Which would also put a crimp in the whole idea of invading another world.
Quote:
None of these are moving millions of kph.
Extrapolation is the only way anyone can – we went from the first rocket used in war during the Napoleonic War to WW2 to cold war ….. then to space flight then to the moon then to mars …. Then extrapolated to?
It is just logical to extrapolate that if we can use a patriot battery to fling one rocket to hit another whist travelling at velocity through the atmosphere then by 1,000 years in the future can we say that we can fling one warship at another warship whist both are travelling at extreme velocity.
Quote:
Stop saying you can based on the closer, slower example.
Ok then … how about the use of a Particle Accelerator – The LHC 18 miles – vacuum – gravity fields – an atom smasher! This is about the closest we have to an example.
Or is there any other example that you can provide that would demonstrate this principle?
How about a bullet can we use that as a slow way to understand how one bullet could be used to hit another bullet? Or animals are also good an example?
Quote:
Why you'd invest the money in it and take up valuable space in your ship is the problem.
Except for the fact that this ship is in space thus the aesthetics can be whatever you want them to be.
This is after all a warship and not a cargo carrier.
This ship was built for one specific task to kill and capture enemy ships and dropships within extreme velocity -it is in no way designed to be a cargo carrier!
This is why it would have a small fleet with it who’s job is to take if from when the ship comes to a stop!
Also how many warships have sacrificed crew comfort for more ammunition space?
Thus why not extrapolate that to sacrifice crew comfort for more engine space?
In addition engineers have a sneaky way of improving upon the current design due to either changing materials or a new power plant or incorporating new design methods to improve structural integrity etc …
And this is exactly what we have here a completely new and revolutionary design – in which it incorporates the largest of engine – twin drive plumes – a massive ram to cut your enemies engine in two with the ability to then latch onto your prey so that you can reel them into normal space so the plundering can begin.
If a ship can travel at extreme velocities and it can remain within formation within extreme velocities then it stands to reason that a ship can intercept another at extreme velocities!
This is science fiction and it is 1,000 years into the future!
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
03/14/21 07:51 PM
70.118.172.64
|
Quote:
This is science fiction and it is 1,000 years into the future!
Yes, it is science fiction, and yes it's set a 1000 plus years down the road, but on the same token, they didn't throw out all the laws of physics and again you are missing a few points, the stories are written to keep folks entertained with action and adventure, NOT textbook reading about Newtonian laws or any of the others, what they use handwavium to cover are things that slow the story down or not really needed to keep the story moving.
Very few scifi shows go deep into real-world space physics, we saw some in BABYLON 5 with the Star Furies, we have seen some in the new version of BATTLESTAR, and the EXPANSE does it to death, but noting in all of those things we don't super detailed reasons why, we get an overview and the story moves on.
Sure BT space flight has some craziness, but that doesn't take away from the story, in all reality every single space battle shown reads like either the author took their ideas from Napolean Era sea battles or WW2 sea and air battles and ran with that. IF those things bore you or stop your enjoyment then ignore them or write your own stuff and just move forward.
Also, Home Rules only go so far before folks point out that you are no longer play Battletech.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
03/14/21 07:54 PM
70.118.172.64
|
Have we taken the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation into account yet?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
03/14/21 08:50 PM
66.74.60.165
|
The discussion did not have squadrons in it from the start. It was about two ships. Not sure why this is such a problem to understand.
Now, time to hit the issue of super large fleets around every jump point. The lack of resources such as MONEY to build and keep them there. If you own a single system, then it requires less ships then multiple systems. But that alone doesn't mean you have the funds or resources to guard the two. But I forget. Your system has unlimited everything. The game is set up so you are trying to rebuild, while others are raiding you to keep you down. Even in the best governments, someone decides they should rule and take out the leader.
And to think. You answered your own argument with the WWII example. You send up fighters to block the enemy, and they leave a force to deal with the fighters, while the bombers continue on to hit their targets. You fighters can either engage the incoming fighters, or open their rear to those very fighters, in order to try and down the bombers. This is a bit off from two ships, but it shows that engaging someone that doesn't want to engage can be difficult.
Also, the numbers of fighters pulled from the ocean includes those that are sea base, IE fights that took place outside of defending the home country.
I see you still don't understand the issue with just sending out forces without intel. You send out your fast ships and find out the enemy just chews them up. Without the BS of having 1000s of ships parked around a planet, it is almost certain, you have limited ships. Fast ships are less armed and armored then slower ones of the same general weight. You engage and they just plain outgun you. You gain intel, but now are without those ships you sent. And replacing them is not as easy as snapping your fingers.... well without the BS of having unlimited resources.
Have you even seen a mention of chairs that can flip head over heels? The swivel along the gravity lines at best. And more weight would be required to even attempt this. There is also a major issue that the locks are likely to fail before the rest of the internal structure that would hold normal ones in their place. And yet, this does not answer the question of how to control the ship once flipped. A full redesign of the ship is required, causing even more issues. Reinforcement of structure with the main focus of down verses trying to deal with even just up is a huge problem.
The means was in place from the start of space travel. You flip the ship over and use the main engines to slow down. This is a fact. Physics is not going to bend just from saying so.
A ship under attack does NOT have everyone strapped down. Replacement personnel are required for multiple positions, and they do NOT have extra seats on the bridge for them to be there. This also includes all around the ship. Maybe you forgot that ships run multiple shifts, meaning people work 8-12 hours, then get time off. When an attack happens, all shifts are active. That means people are going to be moving or in position to deal with damage as it happens. How many sea ships have their engineering crews strapped in while running the boilers? Checking issues that come up, like a simple glitch that comes up? Space is even worse, as you have to make sure any sort of breach gets sealed as quick as possible.
The fix to prevent brain damage from people having their blood rush to their heads, is by NOT doing it in the first place. Just a split second can cause permanent damage. Not everyone is physically fit to be in that situation. Some older officers would be able to had 2 g turns, much less the Red Out situations. Hell, some younger recruits are the same way. So you want to destroy your crews by doing so, then this goes back to the first time the situation of everyone being expendable comes up. You would be removed from command very quickly.
Also, there is a limit to just how much you can accelerate. The power required to move faster does not exist at this point. Hence the reason why normal propulsion can not reach light speed no matter how long they try.
Example of a bullet being used to hit another bullet is easy to shut down. Bullets do not all fly as the same speed. Muzzle velocity shows this. Some are faster then others. This is more in depth then the general population deals with.
A warship needs specific specs to work. There is a required number of crew to run it. They need supplies and everything on the ship is figured out to make the best use of what they have (hopefully). The balance of speed, armor, weapons, crew needs (like food, water, air, a place to sleep) is needed.
It does not carry cargo for merchant purposes, but does carry things required to operate. Fuel and ammo being big ones, with personnel requirements being just as important.
Putting in garbage like extra weight and taking up space to fit it, isn't one of those. A warship needs to be able to work properly. The cost of building warships is bad enough without having to put in things that are not necessary and even have to be custom made. Which the entire decking set up would have to be custom in order to deal with a ship that doesn't flip, but the command deck does. This also changes everything else on the ship as well. Your storage for your ammo is now being pressed in the opposite direction. That means everything from the loaded to the breach has to be custom to work in two different positions. The costs alone would destroy the ability to field many.
There are quite a few ships that take away from crew comforts to store additional ammo. Hot Loading racks is the first step in doing this.
There is some expectations that military personnel will not have the comforts of home, but they do expect a few things. Might suggest you actually check out REAL sea vessels, such as a sub or aircraft carrier from before 1980.
Again. Sci fi is futuristic, but the games mechanics isn't. The things you want don't work in BT. Until the rules get changed, they will never work in BT. Slamming in house rules means you are telling everyone they have to use your rules in order to play. How is this not saying they have to play your vision?
As I don't know what Tsiolkovsky rocket equation is, I will say that I have not taken it into account. Unless that is that anything to do with rocketry will explode at one point is the equation.
|
Karagin
03/14/21 11:24 PM
70.118.172.64
|
Ghostrider, give the Tsiolkovsky Rocket Equation a Google it will cover the part of things about ships and motion and speed and all that.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Requiem
03/15/21 12:11 AM
1.158.229.22
|
Quote:
The discussion did not have squadrons in it from the start. It was about two ships. Not sure why this is such a problem to understand.
And then when it was pointed out that I would not be allowed any energy weapons upon my new ship only physical attacks, and I stated that a secondary ship could be used to incorporate their weapons packages then …. As they do in most navies …. Not sure why this is such a problem.
Quote:
Economics
Problem is no one can actually provide anyone with a figure as to the amount a forward ram knife would cost as well as a secondary drive plume would cost (though there should be a discount when purchasing in bulk.)
There is no way to actually cost a ship like this thus the discussion of cost becomes very difficult to consider !
Still let us consider opportunity cost forgone then shall we.
If you allow a fleet to reach to an inhabited planet and they open up with either an orbital bombardment or a nuclear strike or just drop a couple of RCTs onto the world - would you have preferred the expense of building a ship that could have keep this fleet who knows how far away or would you rather want to give up on such a cost and allow the fleet to reach its destination all because this is what is expected in a conventional warfare – insurance premiums are going to rise if you allow the enemy to reach the door than keep them a couple of blocks away ?
Quote:
You answered your own argument with the WWII example.
Please study this in more detail.
The two were not separate groups – the German fighters were there to protect the bombers! And at that range they only had a very limited time (range) before they had return – they could not protect the bombers all the way and back.
Also realizing which craft are primary targets and which are secondary targets does factor into this.
Quote:
I see you still don't understand the issue with just sending out forces without intel.
Really? … since when did we enter the realm of G2 / S2. Even with normal fleet operations there is a degree of risk.
Quote:
Maybe you forgot that ships run multiple shifts
Really? … this is just normal SOP on every ship.
Quote:
Not everyone is physically fit to be in that situation.
Just like pilots they would go through a medical test?
Quote:
The things you want don't work in BT
Dropships in formation – work
Velocities as given – work
The idea of a twin drive plume is a rule breaker – but not a biggie as the construction rules are just engineering rules
The ability to build the ram is not really a problem given the feats of DoME.
The only real issue is the ability to find the opposing ship within extreme velocity- however given the fact that everyday dropships seem to go back and forward with no issues the idea that that is no detection equipment seems ridiculous given the velocity of the ships and the time it would take to run into planets / asteroids / other ships etc.
Still do not see any issues with not brining this into my Home 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.
|
Requiem
03/15/21 03:13 AM
1.158.229.22
|
Question – why is this being debated to such an extent when it is a Home Rules Vehicle that will only be used in my games and perhaps by others who may consider this vessel to be interesting for their home games?
May I suggest we (including me) all tone it down.
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
03/15/21 04:05 AM
66.74.60.165
|
I don't remember someone saying you couldn't fire energy weapons. I do remember them saying you would have a high to hit number and a very limited time to do so. So comprehension abilities are in decline it seems.
The issue that seems to be most ignored is the games rules do NOT work with the suggestions that are there. In order to put them in, you have to basically destroy the rule set, and add in a bunch of house rules.
Now you say all your posts are to try to present an alternative to the game, yet have not really answered how this is possible without changing the entire rule base? The suggestions that keep coming up destroys the game rules. Try to put in something that doesn't change the rules, but gives them other options. This is where most of the problems seem to lay. Have to house rule everything in order for it to work.
I personally would prefer to have a large fleet of smaller ships, and be able to have a great defense by a great offense. You keep the enemy pinned into their systems or so afraid of you, they don't bother you. A few expensive ships doesn't bring this about. Warships kind of destroyed the ability for dropships to defend systems. I would prefer defenses that can be used without the need for keeping fuel reserves high, meaning stationary units that can strike the enemy before they can fire. Yes, stationary units, once found, become hard to defend. They can be on stations like the Bastion, and be semi mobile, but doesn't have to fly around the system. The game does not support this concept, so I deal with things the way I can.
This is especially true when you have multiple systems they can strike from.
One sided thinking is a downfall to arguments. The Allies also sent in bombers with fighters against the Axis. The bombers kept going as best they could, while fighters engaged to try and stop the enemy. Which also explains why fighters were ditch in the ocean. The ran out of fuel while over the enemy lands, not in the oceans.
Now comes the big question. Do you risk the enemy on your 6, in order to shoot down the bombers? Or do you try and take out the enemy fighters then go after the bombers? Knowing their likely destination and target helps solve this question. But in the end, losing your fighters opens you up to not being able to defend against the next wave.
This is why deep space interdiction is foolish. You send out your fastest ship to engage the enemy, only to find out they wipe out your ships. Now, instead of dealing with the fleet with as many ships as you can, you now have to face them down those ships you sent out. Leaving fighter recon out of this, it is better to engage the ships closer to the world, but not right on top of it. The enemy will have to slow down in order to get their ships in orbit. This is why the game has the history of doing just that. Maybe as close as the moon for striking range. Trying the deep space one may well result in the enemy having taken a different approach path. Might take a little longer, but you don't have to worry so much about the enemy meeting up with you. And what do you know. Your ships are still heading to the jump point looking to engage the incoming fleet, and you missed it by a few hundred thousand klicks. Also, as pointed out, normal 1 g burns happen. Going a little further out and doing a 1.5 g burn for a short while will let you get up to speed. This could be true for flying straight in as well.
The multiple shift shows why not everyone will be belted in when in combat or extreme maneuvers. They will all be at emergency status, and will react to damage to help keep the ship alive. Tiedowns would be use, but not all the time.
Just like the military today, they allow people in that have health problems, but to get people in the military, they over look some. Also, people develop problems and they are covered up. The game runs with the premise that you fill spots as you can. If the best tech you have, can't handle high g turns, then you have to risk it, but you will not be leaving them behind.
Question – why is this being debated to such an extent when it is a Home Rules Vehicle that will only be used in my games and perhaps by others who may consider this vessel to be interesting for their home games?
This statement nullifies everything you say about the posts being for all that want an alternative.
As stated earlier in this response, to be an alternative, it has to come without the need for massive house rules. This is not BT.
And your question stands at this. Present something that can't exist in the game, then defend it against people that tell you with canon logic and rules why it can't exist, then the out of game logic is used to say it can. Why try to force house rules on others with a supposed alternative view of things? The original question was answered, then more was packed in.
|
Requiem
03/15/21 06:27 AM
1.158.229.22
|
Quote:
basically destroy the rule set, and add in a bunch of house rules
Why?
Just need rules
Consider MP for new ship and old ship – even a booster system
Start with a basic test and go from there such as 1st Test - Just need to add in a few modifiers …
the Piloting Skill Roll Table
and the
Attack Modifiers Table
And the
Hit Location Table
And they are not as bad as everyone might think as they are computer assisted.
You could even treat the attack as something similar to one aerospace fighter chasing a second in order to be in an adjacent hex to initiate a physical attack to strike at the engine – whist at the same time both are utilizing their laser weapons against each other. As a first experiment to see if it is possible ….
From there if tweaking is required if it does not work as predicted … see what works and what doesn’t and go from there…
Then there is only the construction rules for a second drive plume and the ram (% of the weight of the ship?) / extra computer power / extra active probes – only laser weapons
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
03/15/21 09:07 AM
70.118.172.64
|
When you add in house rules you are normally adding in things that are either 1) Missing from the game, 2) that try to speed up the game or cut back on dice rolls, or 3) change them to meet what you and your group want something to be, for example, Small Pulse Lasers engaging incoming missile fire or AMS firing on missiles that have engaged another target.
What you keep tossing at all of here basically re-writes large chunks of the game. Not all of us want that, and not all of us can agree on what needs to be changed, and given that we have at least two books with what amounts to house rules for actual gameplay, ie: MaxTech and THB, many will say we don't need more house rules.
I know my own group has our own quirk rules like we allow homemade weapons and other tech items, but even those have to be reasonable and all still have to agree. What you, keep doing, is offering home rules as if we all have played your take on things before and that we all agree with your take on what needs to be changed or tossed out, etc..., which clearly based on the number of comments back to you is not the case. Everyone who has commented has offered logical and reasonable counters to your ideas or tried to temper your ideas so as not to make a whole new game that is no longer Battletech.
Dig through the forum, you will see that all of us have offered our own home rules/tech and all of us have done what you are doing, defend it will passion and ego, and over time we have all also seen and learned that no one here is tossing ideas, they are tossing ideas to keep things ground in the reality of the game.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
03/15/21 01:07 PM
66.74.60.165
|
With all the threads offered for things like this change, most of the changes offered go way to far. Adding in a second engine destroys the entire construction process and would allow craft to have 10 free heatsinks for almost nothing. I can argue the .5 fusion engine is needed to provide extra boost of power. SO 9.5 tons of sinks would be free.
The thruster system for reverse is possible, but as said before. It would cause so many problems that your desire for logic in the game would be destroyed. Every deck would have to be redesigned as this would cause everything to be upside down, as well as have everyone hanging upside down. Your hands would not rest on the table or console, but start lifting above your head, with blood basically pooling in your head. Flipping the deck means space and weight wasted for the entire thing to pivot. This again violates the construction and operations of the game. Not to mention those trying to fly the ship, as in combat, you would have to swap between forward and backward motion.
The introduction of energy shields is yet another thing that removes the rule set.
You might as well play something akin to Stargate, and allow your shielded ships to jump into orbit around worlds and open fire the moment they exist hyperspace.
These suggestions are NOT suggestions as they all rely on using house rules. No one can just take the concept and plug it into their games. It would require them to change a whole lot more then just the rules. This would include complete redesign of all their units, as the question would come, how all this tech was done and no one else had any of it?
I don't disagree with everything. I don't see why fighters, which operated in space, and thru hurricanes, could not do a very slow landing and operate underwater. The pressure on the hull isn't an issue, as the air resistance and the fact it resists things like canon and gauss rifle fire means is should be able to handle at least level 2 underwater. I can see the counter that water will get into the mechanisms from constant water pressure while in water, that flying in a hurricane wouldn't do, so it could damage the controls.
As stated, the game relies on things not being the best. Great detection gear removes the need of a lot of things, like even patrols. So you remove the ability of an inferior number unit taking on a large number of defenders and winning thru hit and runs. It does screw up the concept of finding debris in your path doing the transit runs. Range being one of my pet peeves. Can't hit at a klick on the ground. But I am not demanding it be changed. Having range means no caving in the had of a mech or watching one fall as the leg snaps off from a good kick. There is no reason beyond ambush to engage in physical attacks with range. Then it becomes what the clans wanted. Stay at range as much as you can. Yeah, the to hit numbers bite, but I would rather fire off 11's with energy weapons then allow the enemy to be able to return fire. Yes, I know this tends to devolve into artillery battles at that point.
|
|
|
Extra information
|
0 registered and 151 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 enabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Topic views: 16597
|
|
|
|
|
|
|