28 replies to this topic

[Garonis Buhallin]

Interesting to note that even today our direct fire weapons have much greater ranges than what is found in Battletech. For instance, an M-1 main gun range is around 2 km, with some shots having hit out to 3 km. This is documented. Somewhere in the lore I read that an AC/20 is around 100 to 200 mm bore, depending on the manufacturer, etc, etc. I have personally hit targets with a M-2 .50 cal machine gun at 1000 meters. Once again, lore at one time said machine guns were roughly .30 to .50 caliber. That is 7.62mm and 12.4mm, respectively. Battletech ranges I suppose were for ease in explaining scale on the maps, and perhaps were envisioned by guys sitting around having no real idea of max effective ranges of real world weapons.

[Elyam]

I'm not sure how a topic that began with the OP questioning how different BT would be if the game was designed now instead of in the 80s...morphed into a conversation about the future potential of mechs as a battlefield tool and whether anything like them will ever come into actual use...

That said, I think two futures as predicted by Heinlein and later, by manga and anime and then throughout our hobbies, stand the greatest chance of occurrence:

1) man-sized to twice-main-sized (roughly) powered armor. As technology reaches a place where soldier armor can potentially eliminate damage from small arms, and as the need for soldier endurance while carrying loads becomes mitigate-able with powered exoskeletons that are finally achievable via miniaturized dependable power sources, these two avenues blend to give us the true future soldier. It's practically inevitable that this iteration of mecha will occur

2) mobile suits the size of BT mechs and Gundam mecha as fighting vehicles not on the ground, but in zero-gee space. In a medium where nearly all vehicles will be oriented for easiest roll along the same axis as their primary thrust engines, humanoid-shapes move that easiest axis 90-deg and can gain advantage. Certainly one could say many other simpler shapes might do, but there may well be a natural desire to keep to the humanoid shape, especially as an enlarged evolution of the already-existing systems begun above in point 1 (postulating that 1 will exists decades before point 2), not to mention as an evolution of combat space-suits

No matter how much I love and have invested in BT and other mecha games and stories, I find it hard to imagine power armor in our future getting beyond a few times-man-sized unless and eventually in space.

Edited by Elyam, 30 September 2013 - 12:13 PM.

[Rowanas]

Alas, it's the same train of thought here. Power armour is something we're working towards even now, but we just don't need mechs. We've seen the last tank battle, and with it, the last thing we would use a mech for.

[Anjian]

The technology portrayed in Battletech isn't just awful but inaccurate even by modern warfare standards. A squad of M1 Abrams would not sweat wiping out a company of Battlemechs if these Battlemechs are equipped with weapons guided by BT rules. A modern 120mm cannon would hit harder than an AC20, with ranges that exceed Gauss by 2x.

If we are to "modernize" Battletech weapons, we can start with range. In other words, everything even the machineguns are going to exceed 1000m. Now imagine if you play a hypothetical MWO game where every weapon has no range limit, then you start to have some idea what real mech warfare should be.

The next is that you cannot have mechs standup all the time, making them easy targets. Even in the anime shows that Battletech copied from, notably Dougram (source of Battlemaster, Thunderbolt, Shadowhawk, Griffin and Wolverine), mechs can crouch, kneel or go prone, to reduce their front profile while shooting. In other words, they also act like true mobile infantry. When you hold a weapon, you don't hold in chest level, with your torso fully exposed. You hold it like the way a cop holds a gun with his two hands or a soldier holds a rifle. Its all meant to minimize front profile and weapons recoil, and it increases the chances your arms will take the bullet as opposed to the chest.

Modern tanks are incredibly agile too, if you ever watched their exercises again. What is this about mechs as walking tanks? Unless those tanks are slow like in people's imagination. Real tanks are not slow. Battlemechs should not be going around stomping like dinosaurs because the truth is, in modern warfare, they would be quickly extinct like one.

For mechs to be practical in the battlefield they must be fast. This means they need to skate (ala Heavy Gear, Votoms), or use jumpjets that can boost or cover quite a distance (like Armored Core). In fact, if the situation is low or zero gravity, something as big as stompy on Earth gravity like a HIghlander with jumpjets would be fighting like a mech in Armored Core instead if it is on an asteroid or small moon. In space, given jumpjets, even an Atlas can fight like a Gundam. And should --- this is just physics.

The most realistic simulation of "mech" warfare using MWO tools would be is to have everyone fight with light mechs that fitted with jumpjets and small hit boxes, like Spiders, with more than double the range of the weapons.

As for mech armor, to increase deflection they need to be streamlined and angled for maximum deflection. The Japanese are right about this when they portray mecha with strongly angled shapes.

Mecha is not all about fighting either. They should also be tasked with engineering and construction, logistics, and recovery. There should be mechs that repair other mechs, mechs that recover mechs and pilots in the battlefield, mechs that help build stationary defenses for example. There are also specialty mechs, such as antiaircraft mechs, similar to Jagermechs, except that all the weapons are autoaim and autofiring, like AMS.

Edited by Anjian, 04 October 2013 - 11:51 PM.

[Skylarr]

Anjian, how much of the Battletech rule books and lore have you actually read? An M1 Abrams tank is not as strong as a Mech. An Abrams main gun would only do a single point of damage. This is like comparing a M26 Pershing heavy tank to a M1 Abrams.

The ranges were kept low because BattleTech started off as a Table Top game. So, they wanted to keep combatants close together. Later they would say that the reason why combatants in the BattleTech Universe had to get within a kilometer of each other was because of the BattleComputers and Electronics inside all combat vehicles.

The M1 Abrams has a top speed of 40 kph off road. Slower than most Mechs.

You say that Mechs should act like Mechas in the Anime shows. Why should they? The creators wanted to create a game about large walking tanks that was different than everyone else. BattleTech has been around for almost 30 years. So I guess they were right.

Instead of everyone sitting around discussing as to how the BattleTech Technologies does not match ours. They should realize that this is Science Fiction and accept it for the way it is. How about putting up suggestions as to why the BattleTech Technologies work the way they do.

[Anjian]

We are talking of 'modern' battlemechs here. Thus an application of modern technology. An Abrams weighs about 67 tons by the way, that's heavier than a lot of mechs. More so, its packing all that tonnage into a much smaller package. Engineers know long ago, the best ratio of protection is between armor and surface area. In other words, its density, in addition to frontal profile. How would a modern 120mm cannon produce only one point of damage? Those things have a range of 4km or 4000m.

Of course Battletech is science fiction. But its bad science fiction. Its the only science fiction I know where the 'future' warfare is outright inferior to actual modern warfare.

Longevity of Battletech doesn't make the franchise technology right. Gundam is still around even longer, and is far more recognizable around the world. Much of the design precepts set by anime like Gundam and Macross continue to morph into different anime series and games. This isn't just a franchise here, its a complete genre on its own. The whole concept that a mech must be a walking tank is thinking within a box what a mech should be, when what you really need is to think outside of the box.

The only reason why Mechwarrior is the way it is now, is tradition. If its going to be refreshed within the frames of the technogy of what we know now, it would end up being a complete reboot.

[Karl Streiger]

Anjian, on 05 October 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

How would a modern 120mm cannon produce only one point of damage? Those things have a range of 4km or 4000m.

Afaik - a 120mm sabot will hit a todays ceramic alloy armor - and without beeing able to penetrate it will still damage the armor to a different degree.
Same goes for HEAT as well as for small caliber weapons that don't bounce of - from the outer steel shelling. (bullets doesn't bounce of from ceramic)

So given the ability to produce more flexible and more dense materials in the 30th century the armor is even better - the only way to damage it is to degenerate the armor - destroying plates of ceramic and underlaying materials like nano tubes or aramid. - best way to do that is High Explosive...much of them -> so ballistic would fire APCBC -HE mostly. (those large caliber things from early WWII)

But thats SciFi...we are talking about a game:
First TT: BattleTech would have been a strategic game not a skirmish game to reflect those ranges.
Next MW: if we would have ranges of >4km....how do you want to hit a fast moving target at 4km with your 60mm AC2? Your shell travels 2sec....the longest travel time curently in game without guiding system is the AC20 to hit targets at 800m.

Everything above one second is hard when your foe moves faster as 20m/s or is even doging. That means all weapons have to be guided. You just choose the target and hit fire - while that would be realistic too(much more as current point n click) - it would not be a kind of fun for the masses.

Talking about other Mecha:
Heavy Gear for example: the ballistic weapons are same or more worse as stuff we have today, while the advanced technologys - like laser or particel beams are on a level that seems to be a kind of magic

Edited by Karl Streiger, 06 October 2013 - 11:14 PM.

[Nebfer]

Anjian, on 04 October 2013 - 11:46 PM, said:

The technology portrayed in Battletech isn't just awful but inaccurate even by modern warfare standards. A squad of M1 Abrams would not sweat wiping out a company of Battlemechs if these Battlemechs are equipped with weapons guided by BT rules. A modern 120mm cannon would hit harder than an AC20, with ranges that exceed Gauss by 2x.

You do know that Lore wise a Gauss Slug has the KE of a 16 inch naval shell? 125kg hypersonic slugs easily have 300 megajoules KE range. A modern 120mm APFSDS round as used by the M1 Abrams hits it's target with roughly 8 megajoules of KE. Quite a bit less no? True raw KE is not every thing... Also Autocannons are stated to be superior weapons to the weapons that came before them (I.e. the weapons found of real life tanks). An AC-20 could easily be firing 8 or more hypervelocity 120mm shells in a single burst (we already know a AC-5 in the same caliber range fires 2 or 3 rounds in a single burst)...

Quote

If we are to "modernize" Battletech weapons, we can start with range. In other words, everything even the machineguns are going to exceed 1000m. Now imagine if you play a hypothetical MWO game where every weapon has no range limit, then you start to have some idea what real mech warfare should be.

A likely assumption, though the writers state that Battletech is more about in your face combat rather than playing sniper tech. Though the weapons ranges in a modern remake would likely be more detached from the games ranges or scales changed... Giving battletech at it's current scale real life ranges would require a playing area of 1100 square feet (~100 square meters), that's way to much area...

While the novels have followed the games ranges fairly closely, something that likely would be changed in a reboot, their are still examples and oddity's that indicate that the ranges are not quite it seems...
The novels give infantry ranges that would out range battlemechs if their game ranges where correct... (1km+ ranges pop up at times), never mind the power of B-tech infantry weapons... like the laser pistol with a out put of 100 kilojoules (and before you say no way, it also states a yield in grams of TNT, being 20, close enough for government work...).
The RPG also dose the same (infantry weapons can hit targets out to 2.5km...)
Ground units in space can hit targets up to 9 or 18km away from it (depending on where the units are in the hex...)
Ground units engaging airborne targets seem to have a range increase of up to 4 times their ground range...
Entertainingly elevation is not tracked, so it's perfectly viable to engage a mech on a level 600 elevation with a small laser as long as it's no more than 4 hexes away from you, even though said target is 3.6km higher than you...
And then theirs the advanced rules allowing for many a weapon to hit out to effectively the horizon...
Also theirs an older rules set found in a semi official work that effectively gave a 7.5x range increase for ballistic weapons, 5x for missile and LOS for energy. This rules was largely forgotten about, and it's publication was largely deemed non canon, though the devs can use bits that suits them if need be... (this is the old Battletechnology magazines).

Quote

The next is that you cannot have mechs standup all the time, making them easy targets. Even in the anime shows that Battletech copied from, notably Dougram (source of Battlemaster, Thunderbolt, Shadowhawk, Griffin and Wolverine), mechs can crouch, kneel or go prone, to reduce their front profile while shooting. In other words, they also act like true mobile infantry. When you hold a weapon, you don't hold in chest level, with your torso fully exposed. You hold it like the way a cop holds a gun with his two hands or a soldier holds a rifle. Its all meant to minimize front profile and weapons recoil, and it increases the chances your arms will take the bullet as opposed to the chest.

Their are already rules for going prone, Hull down, Crawling, Climbing, leaping down cliffs, and if you even want hanging off a tall enough cliff or building. In any case battlemechs are not super infantry, they never have been described as such. And their is little reason why Battletech has to follow the super infantry trope...

Quote

Modern tanks are incredibly agile too, if you ever watched their exercises again. What is this about mechs as walking tanks? Unless those tanks are slow like in people's imagination. Real tanks are not slow. Battlemechs should not be going around stomping like dinosaurs because the truth is, in modern warfare, they would be quickly extinct like one.

Do you even know how fast a battletech unit is? According to their specs most real world MBTs would be classed as 3/5 (4/6 at best). 3/5 or 54kph is slow in B-tech terms, assault mech speeds, many lighter mechs reach speeds of 8/12 (~130kph).

*Yes I am aware of the long standing "rumors" of MBTs being ungoverned and reaching higher speeds (75ish MPH, 120ish kph from what I can find), however until the official stats are amended to state these speeds then their official speeds are the 40-45ish MPH road speeds stated by their manufactures and or governments. And thats their road speeds, off road is a bit slower...

Quote

For mechs to be practical in the battlefield they must be fast. This means they need to skate (ala Heavy Gear, Votoms), or use jumpjets that can boost or cover quite a distance (like Armored Core). In fact, if the situation is low or zero gravity, something as big as stompy on Earth gravity like a HIghlander with jumpjets would be fighting like a mech in Armored Core instead if it is on an asteroid or small moon. In space, given jumpjets, even an Atlas can fight like a Gundam. And should --- this is just physics.

Skating around like a heavy gear? do not make me laugh... Top speed of most hvy gears is around 96kph on their wheels, their are battlemechs that can brake 300kph, just running (and can brake 400 using more advanced rules)...
As for the Gundam, well give a battlemech 6 jump jets and it can pull 1G of acceleration in space, which is better than the stated .93Gs the RX-78-2 Gundam gets... with 3.6km of Delta V (the Gundams DV is unknown but likely under 10km/s), Also ASFs the staple of B-tech space forces easily have 120km of DV, Far out striping every thing in Gundam (particularly UC universe).

Perhaps battlemechs could be a bit faster, but their not slow by any real means. True their not Armored core fast, but AC gets stupidly fast... One of the things I would do is give all battlemechs a free movement point.

Quote

Mecha is not all about fighting either. They should also be tasked with engineering and construction, logistics, and recovery. There should be mechs that repair other mechs, mechs that recover mechs and pilots in the battlefield, mechs that help build stationary defenses for example. There are also specialty mechs, such as antiaircraft mechs, similar to Jagermechs, except that all the weapons are autoaim and autofiring, like AMS.

Hehe, they already have much of what you suggest, heck Battlemechs themselves originate from industrial mechs.

But one thing to note is as versatile as a mech is in B-tech it's not the end all of units... Battlemechs do not fly (well) nor are they largely used in space (ASF domain), and Sea is another area where they are not as capable in.

Though while in real life most weapons would largely be auto aimed and auto firing, I do not think this feature would be very popular in games of most sorts... Though technically most mech weapons are auto aimed any way, the pilot just places the targeting courser over the target and the mech aims the weapons automatically.

Though one thing I would do is explain that a miss in not inherently a miss, but can be a hit that deals no damage...

[KalebFenoir]

Jammerben87, on 30 September 2013 - 05:22 AM, said:

They would have to vastly improve their stability systems as well, legs are not great at absorbing recoil, otherwise they would be a lot less accurate than your average artillery piece. An it would have to be self loading, but that is already being done in some parts.

Supposedly in Battletech, the best artillery and missile support designs sport the Bird-leg design. Something about the way the joints move and shift when heavy weapons are fired just makes the torso settle into the legs a bit like a bobbing bird, rather than a standard human-shaped mech that might need to brace itself before firing. I think that's why the Hunchback has such heavy-looking legs; to support and counteract the recoil of that killer AC/20, most of the weight is in the thick, stumpy looking legs and wide feet. The gun itself would also have recoil surpressors to kill some of the recoil, but definitely being foot-heavy helps.

I suppose we'd only really know if they built a bird-leg-mounted missile launcher system and fired it, but I can kinda see the logic. As for self-loading... Either the missiles and shells in mechs would be surprisingly small (to fit in a bin that has to fit in the mech and still be moved around), or maybe the mech wouldn't actually carry as much as we're all used to in terms of ammo capacity?