Jump to content

Chance For Reactor Explosion If Killed By 3 Engine Criticals


18 replies to this topic

#1 MadTulip

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 262 posts

Posted 22 July 2014 - 03:45 AM

BOOOM!

implementation could be used from a single artillery shells aoe code with different sizes and damage values.

Explosion damage based on engine size going off would be nice :). maybe engine size/50 so that a 400xl engine explosion causes 80 damage in a like ... 15m radius.

also include a nice animation please :D.

inspire by TT rule.:
"Battlemech engine explosion" on p.45 in Tactical Handbook
Source

Edited by MadTulip, 22 July 2014 - 10:33 AM.


#2 9erRed

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • 1,566 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 22 July 2014 - 06:16 AM

Greetings,

The engines within the Mech's (from Lore) do not operate in that fashion.
(your thinking of a Fission power unit, not a Fusion unit.)

- If the 'containment' magnetic shielding is breached the reaction stops and goes out.
- Due to the internal vacuum within the engine there would be a sudden rush of air into the breach point/s.
- If anything, the only element seen would be the ejection of the superheated air back out the breach locations.
~ This could/might cause some heat spikes or Damage to non shielded objects nearby.

No explosion, just a possible flash. (no 'stack-polling', as it was called.)

Reference:
Fusion engines usually will only shut down if damaged or if heat is uncontrolled. Unlike popular belief, there is absolutely no risk of a fusion engine accidentally becoming a nuclear weapon. There have been a number of cases of fusion engines being "over revved" and exploding with devastating force, but this is more akin to a boiler explosion than a true nuclear explosion. More often a destroyed engine will be punctured by weapons fire. Because the plasma is held in a vacuum chamber (to isolate the superheated plasma from the cold walls of the reactor; contact with the walls would super-chill the plasma below fusion temperatures), a punctured reactor can suck in air where the air is superheated. Normal thermal expansion of the air causes the air to burst out in a brilliant lightshow often mistaken for a "nuclear explosion". This thermal expansion damages anything within 90 meters of the destroyed 'Mech.
Such dramatic failures are rare, though. It is difficult to sustain the fusion reaction and very easy to shut down. Safety systems or damage to containment coils will almost always shut down the engine before such an explosion occurs. The massive shielding of the engine (in the case of standard fusion engines, this is a tungsten carbide shell that accounts for over 2/3 of the weight of the engine) usually buys the safety systems the milliseconds needed to shutdown the engine when severe damage is inflicted.

- Interesting idea for gameplay, it's been tried before (MW:LL), but it does not follow any of the Lore or Technical descriptions from BattleTech.

9erRed

#3 Mitsuragi

    Legendary Founder

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 311 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationOUT OF BOUNDS

Posted 22 July 2014 - 06:57 AM

This would add more tactics to the game. Shooting the DWF in the middle of your enemies turns him into a bomb. I'm 50/50 on this. Either way I want an explosion animation even if it doesn't do any damage.

#4 9erRed

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • 1,566 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 22 July 2014 - 07:17 AM

Greetings all,

This is probably what the OP is looking for, but it's know as 'stack-polling' and not a BattleTech normal event. In fact, frond upon by most.

Taken from MW:LL critical engine destruction, lots of eye candy but, again not a normal event.

http://www.youtube.c...rkpxItO0zOY#t=8


9erRed

Edited by 9erRed, 22 July 2014 - 07:19 AM.


#5 101011

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 1,393 posts
  • LocationSector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha, on a small blue-green planet orbiting a small, unregarded yellow sun.

Posted 22 July 2014 - 07:33 AM

View PostMitsuragi, on 22 July 2014 - 06:57 AM, said:

This would add more tactics to the game. Shooting the DWF in the middle of your enemies turns him into a bomb. I'm 50/50 on this. Either way I want an explosion animation even if it doesn't do any damage.

But why would there be an explosion animation when there is no explosion? That makes no sense. Really, PGI did the right thing by leaving stackpoling out.

#6 Mitsuragi

    Legendary Founder

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 311 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationOUT OF BOUNDS

Posted 22 July 2014 - 07:42 AM

View Post101011, on 22 July 2014 - 07:33 AM, said:

But why would there be an explosion animation when there is no explosion? That makes no sense. Really, PGI did the right thing by leaving stackpoling out.


Because in lore you are damaging the shielding of the fusion reactor and when containment is breached the fusion reaction runs uncontrolled and causes an explosion. In lore, this is how Kai Allard defeated the Falcon Guards in the Gash on Twycross. He intentionally lost containment of his fusion reactor, caused it to explode, and set off the charges in the cliff face with the force of the explosion.

#7 101011

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 1,393 posts
  • LocationSector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha, on a small blue-green planet orbiting a small, unregarded yellow sun.

Posted 22 July 2014 - 07:49 AM

View PostMitsuragi, on 22 July 2014 - 07:42 AM, said:


Because in lore you are damaging the shielding of the fusion reactor and when containment is breached the fusion reaction runs uncontrolled and causes an explosion. In lore, this is how Kai Allard defeated the Falcon Guards in the Gash on Twycross. He intentionally lost containment of his fusion reactor, caused it to explode, and set off the charges in the cliff face with the force of the explosion.

View Post9erRed, on 22 July 2014 - 06:16 AM, said:

Greetings,

The engines within the Mech's (from Lore) do not operate in that fashion.
(your thinking of a Fission power unit, not a Fusion unit.)

- If the 'containment' magnetic shielding is breached the reaction stops and goes out.
- Due to the internal vacuum within the engine there would be a sudden rush of air into the breach point/s.
- If anything, the only element seen would be the ejection of the superheated air back out the breach locations.
~ This could/might cause some heat spikes or Damage to non shielded objects nearby.

No explosion, just a possible flash. (no 'stack-polling', as it was called.)

Reference:
Fusion engines usually will only shut down if damaged or if heat is uncontrolled. Unlike popular belief, there is absolutely no risk of a fusion engine accidentally becoming a nuclear weapon. There have been a number of cases of fusion engines being "over revved" and exploding with devastating force, but this is more akin to a boiler explosion than a true nuclear explosion. More often a destroyed engine will be punctured by weapons fire. Because the plasma is held in a vacuum chamber (to isolate the superheated plasma from the cold walls of the reactor; contact with the walls would super-chill the plasma below fusion temperatures), a punctured reactor can suck in air where the air is superheated. Normal thermal expansion of the air causes the air to burst out in a brilliant lightshow often mistaken for a "nuclear explosion". This thermal expansion damages anything within 90 meters of the destroyed 'Mech.
Such dramatic failures are rare, though. It is difficult to sustain the fusion reaction and very easy to shut down. Safety systems or damage to containment coils will almost always shut down the engine before such an explosion occurs. The massive shielding of the engine (in the case of standard fusion engines, this is a tungsten carbide shell that accounts for over 2/3 of the weight of the engine) usually buys the safety systems the milliseconds needed to shutdown the engine when severe damage is inflicted.

- Interesting idea for gameplay, it's been tried before (MW:LL), but it does not follow any of the Lore or Technical descriptions from BattleTech.

9erRed


Do you know why it is called Stackpoling? It is because the writers of Battletech fiction came up with it to increase excitement. In TT, which is what matters most, 'Mechs do not explode.

#8 BARBAR0SSA

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,136 posts
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 22 July 2014 - 08:15 AM

View Post9erRed, on 22 July 2014 - 07:17 AM, said:

Greetings all,

This is probably what the OP is looking for, but it's know as 'stack-polling' and not a BattleTech normal event. In fact, frond upon by most.

Taken from MW:LL critical engine destruction, lots of eye candy but, again not a normal event.

http://www.youtube.c...rkpxItO0zOY#t=8


9erRed



Oh wow...not gonna lie, my nipples are hard.

#9 MadTulip

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 262 posts

Posted 22 July 2014 - 10:28 AM

Amazing how much you know about fusion reactors, you should build one. How ever it works it is probably used as the prefered engine because its energy output per weight is highest among known engine types. that suggests that the density of energy in the engine is highest among known engines which gives me the impression that striking it with a hammer might be a bad idea although i dont know how it works.

regarding battletech TT rules i was refering to
"Battlemech engine explosion" on p.45 in Tactical Handbook

This rule states "Whenever all the internal structure of a mech is destroyed in a single turn" instead of the 3 crit slots. Im not sure if there is an additional rule for the 3 crit slots, or maybe a later rule which i cant find atm. If i remember correctly 3 crits on the engine would cause it to explode in Megamek which to my best knowledge used TT rules 1 to 1.

ill update the op with the reference.


Here is a link to the source

Edited by MadTulip, 22 July 2014 - 10:33 AM.


#10 Strum Wealh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 5,025 posts
  • LocationPittsburgh, PA

Posted 22 July 2014 - 05:36 PM

View PostMadTulip, on 22 July 2014 - 03:45 AM, said:

BOOOM!

implementation could be used from a single artillery shells aoe code with different sizes and damage values.

Explosion damage based on engine size going off would be nice :). maybe engine size/50 so that a 400xl engine explosion causes 80 damage in a like ... 15m radius.

also include a nice animation please ;).

inspire by TT rule.:
"Battlemech engine explosion" on p.45 in Tactical Handbook
Source

Causing a Fusion Engine to explode in BattleTech requires it taking four or more ctitical hits in the same turn; taking three critical hits only makes it shut own without exploding.

"The fusion engine of a ‘Mech may explode any time four or more of its slots are destroyed in the same phase of a turn, usually when the center torso location is destroyed (also destroying the equipment contained therein).
When the fusion engine of a ‘Mech takes four or more critical hits in the same phase, roll 2D6. On a result of 10 or higher, the engine explodes. In the case of fusion-powered Combat and Support Vehicles and aerospace fighters, the engine explodes on a 2D6 result of 12 after an engine critical hit." - Tactical Operations, pg. 78

"’Mech fusion engines have 3 points of shielding. Each critical hit to an engine slot destroys 1 point of shielding. As shielding is destroyed, the amount of heat escaping from the ’Mech’s fusion drive increases... A 'Mech is considered destroyed and out of the game if it suffers three engine hits (remember to count engine slots in the side torso if the torso is destroyed)." - Total Warfare, pg. 126

"If at any time during the self-destruct sequence the engine receives the three critical hits required to destroy the engine, the self-destruct sequence is aborted as the system controlling the sequence is destroyed. However, if an engine in this situation takes four critical hits in the same phase, then it could still explode as noted above." - Tactical Operations, pg. 78

In order to make a 'Mech "stackpole" in TT, one needs to simultaneously destroy 4 Engine crits, AND roll a 10, 11, or 12 on a 2D6 roll - which, according to the 2D6 probabilities, represents a ~16.7% (or 1 in 6) chance of the Engine exploding IF one manages to get 4 (or more) critical hits on it in the first place.

----------

View PostMadTulip, on 22 July 2014 - 10:28 AM, said:

Amazing how much you know about fusion reactors, you should build one. How ever it works it is probably used as the prefered engine because its energy output per weight is highest among known engine types. that suggests that the density of energy in the engine is highest among known engines which gives me the impression that striking it with a hammer might be a bad idea although i dont know how it works.

BattleMech Fusion Engines are based on real-world devices called tokamaks, which people have been building since the 1950s, and which serve as the basis of fusion power research programs like JET & NSTX & SST-1, as well as planned programs like ITER and DEMO.

Among the notable positive aspects of fusion power, and one of its primary advantages over fission power, is the low catastrophic accident potential.
  • "There is no possibility of a catastrophic accident in a fusion reactor resulting in major release of radioactivity to the environment or injury to non-staff, unlike modern fission reactors. The primary reason is that the requirements for nuclear fusion differ greatly from nuclear fission: fusion requires extremely precise and controlled temperature, pressure, and magnetic field parameters for any net energy to be produced, and a far smaller amount of fuel. If the reactor suffered damage or lost even a small degree of required control, fusion reactions and heat generation would rapidly cease."
  • "The plasma is burnt at optimal conditions, and any significant change will render it unable to react or to produce excess heat. In fusion reactors the reaction process is so delicate that this level of safety is inherent; no elaborate failsafe mechanism is required. Although the plasma in a fusion power plant will have a volume of 1000 cubic meters or more, the density of the plasma is extremely low, and the total amount of fusion fuel in the vessel is very small, typically a few grams. If the fuel supply is closed, the reaction stops within seconds."
See pages 35 through 37 of TechManual for the details of BT Fusion Engine operation, or the above links for research into the real-world equivalent.

#11 TyGeR STD

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • 245 posts
  • LocationGa

Posted 22 July 2014 - 11:29 PM

I dont care either way, but if it is put in it should be a 0.1% chance for it to happen, so its a very rare event. Maybe a 0.5% if you die from overheating.

#12 9erRed

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • 1,566 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 23 July 2014 - 08:20 AM

Greetings all,

In rating Fusion Engines, they are rated by comparing the amount of energy input to the energy output, the weight matters not.
~ game-wise, it's all about the weight and placement locations of the engine. (nothing on the power output.)

- As stated, the BattleTech fusion engines weight is all in the shielding and shell.
- The actual material that is creating the reaction is less that a gram of substance.

Within the BattleTech timelines there are multiple types of Fusion engines being worked on.
- We have in game, the standard type, and the XL type. (Clans have their smaller XL equivalents)
- There's 2 more on the horizon.

'Light' Fusion Engine: (around 3062 Timeline)
~ the Light Fusion Engine weighs only 75% of a standard Fusion Engine. While not as dramatic as the 50% weight saving of an XL Engine, the real benefit of the Light Fusion Engine is that while it intrudes into the side torsos of a BattleMech, it takes up the same amount of space as a Clan extra-light engine, allowing a Light Fusion Engine equipped 'Mech to survive the destruction of a side-torso that would cripple an IS XL engine equipped 'Mech.
'Compact' Fusion Engine: (around 3072 timeline)
~ utilizes denser radiation shielding and other features to reduce the engine's volume by half. There is a weight penalty for the density; compact fusion engines are 50% heavier than the standard fusion engine, limiting its use to 'Mechs that require a lot of internal space and/or have tonnage to spare. One benefit of this arrangement is that penetrating hits are less likely to hit the smaller profile of the compact fusion engine than they would a bulkier standard fusion engine.

Breaking news of real life Fusion power:
IRL last week scientists finally created a short sustained Fusion reaction that created more energy than was input.
- It didn't last long, but it's the first time in 40 years of trying.
(there's two known methods of creating a fusion reaction, magnetic or laser, they used laser.)
http://rt.com/usa/fu...r-ignition-806/

From all the comments and TT rule posts, it seems there may be a rule precedence for some form of 'reaction' from a catastrophic engine destruction. But as also explained the 'reaction' would only be similar to a pressurized boiler exploding due to the 'ignition mass' no longer having the system to stay ignited.
(this type of engine can never have an runaway situation, magnetic field or shielding goes, the reaction stops.)

Just saying,
9erRed

#13 Vandul

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,342 posts
  • LocationYork, New

Posted 23 July 2014 - 12:32 PM

Wasnt the term "stack poling" derived from the BT writer Michael Stackpole?

#14 KamikazeRat

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 711 posts

Posted 23 July 2014 - 03:57 PM

View Post9erRed, on 22 July 2014 - 06:16 AM, said:


- If the 'containment' magnetic shielding is breached the reaction stops and goes out.
- Due to the internal vacuum within the engine there would be a sudden rush of air into the breach point/s.
- If anything, the only element seen would be the ejection of the superheated air back out the breach locations.
~ This could/might cause some heat spikes or Damage to non shielded objects nearby.


this pretty much sums up the whole thing, 99 time out of 100, it just winks out, once in a while, you get a hot belch of air, not material from the reaction itself, just the heat from it being conducted back out.

so i would like to see everyone in a 10m radius getting hit with the equivalent of a few flamer hits. heat spike, little armor toasting, pretty colors... nothing serious

#15 Nightmare1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,636 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationPeeking over your shoulder while eating your cookies.

Posted 23 July 2014 - 04:15 PM

Two points:
1) There were a few cases in which Mech reactors detonated in the books. It's been a while since I read them, so I don't remember exactly which titles featured this. However, it did happen on rare occasions (no, I am not referring to ammo explosions).

2) We had exploding Mechs in the MW4 series, which was really terrific! It would add an element to the game play here in MWO that would further discourage huddling and would make it more risky for the Mediums and Lights to zip up and park behind Assaults. As a Light and Medium Pilot myself, I recognize that this would be something of an indirect nerf to my Mechs, but I think that the offsets (more interesting game play, encouragement to avoid huddling, etc.) would effectively outweigh such a nerf.

Let's do it! :D

#16 Strum Wealh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 5,025 posts
  • LocationPittsburgh, PA

Posted 23 July 2014 - 05:08 PM

View PostVandul, on 23 July 2014 - 12:32 PM, said:

Wasnt the term "stack poling" derived from the BT writer Michael Stackpole?

Yes.

Specifically, it is a reference to how Mr. Stackpole heavily over-exaggerated the grequency & effects of a Fusion Engine's loss of containment; as noted above, both general TT (via TechManual) and reality dictate that the kind of massive nuclear explosions that Stackpole described simply don't happen in tokamaks & similar devices (like BT Fusion Engines).

#17 TyGeR STD

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • 245 posts
  • LocationGa

Posted 23 July 2014 - 05:43 PM

all you super nerds that want to get super techy on OOHHH NNNOOOO IT COULD NEVVER HAPPAPPANEN. If you want to start breaking down this game and the way stuff works with science then this game would totally fall apart. serveral ppl that are asking for this think it would be a cool add on to the game, it doesn't matter to me either way, if it was put in it should have a very small chance to happen, not be the mega bomb that a locus could run in and set off in the middle of a group and criple them all.

#18 TuntematonSika

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 122 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationPig with an identity crisis.

Posted 23 July 2014 - 11:28 PM

View Post9erRed, on 23 July 2014 - 08:20 AM, said:

Breaking news of real life Fusion power:
IRL last week scientists finally created a short sustained Fusion reaction that created more energy than was input.
- It didn't last long, but it's the first time in 40 years of trying.
(there's two known methods of creating a fusion reaction, magnetic or laser, they used laser.)
http://rt.com/usa/fu...r-ignition-806/

9erRed


This happened in February, ages ago.

#19 CocoaJin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,607 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA

Posted 24 July 2014 - 11:28 AM

No Hollywood nuke explosions...please. After the first day, it will lose all novelty and just be a nuisance, meaningless show of blah. Like cookies, you can only take so much empty fluff before it makes you sick.

Ammo cook offs are more than enough, a similar but reasonable reactor discharge or a high pressure plasma venting could be modeled, only to give more variety in a mech's death throws...but no need for a theatrical "money shot" of sorts.

I'm a grown man, don't want or need empty calories, I want substance and quality...i'll take steak and veggies over cookies any day.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users