Hyper Extending Actuators, I seemed to have attributed this feature: "The second were its highly-articulate ankle actuators, which not only allowed the Quickdraw keep its footing more easily on difficult terrain such as gravel, mud and ice, but also traverse gradients up to 12° steeper than other 'Mechs of its weight class" with the Hyper Extending Actuators. It's sort of not possible to test with certaintry however. So the one without tracks would have 'Highly Articulate' ankle actuators, but sadly I haven't found that trait.
Oh, forgot to comment about this. On a Quickdraw the ankles would grant the "Stable" positive quirk, in addition, because fluff states how fragile they are, they would get the "Weak Legs" and possibly "Exposed Actuators" negative quirks. In all the Quickdraw gets two positive (Hyperextending Actuators and Stable) and one or two negative (Weak Legs and Exposed Actuators) negative quirks. Of those, only three would apply to the legs: Stable, Weak Legs, and Exposed Actuators.
Random side note: It took me a bit to figure out how to get Skunkwerks started. There's an armored vehicle werks, a mech werks. There is something for 'keeping score'... but does it have a campaign thing like Megamek HQ? Because I noticed Skunkwerks on the mech side of things is far more involved and with the socio-economics, etc., that PHT mentioned I figured that Skunkwerks might have something along those lines.
Then again I noticed Skunkwerks can export to megamek, but megamek can't go back (you can go indirectly by exporting to HTML or text and then bring it into Skunkwerks that way; but Skunkwerks made a way to go directly into Megamek).
To Nathan's second post:
I sort of gathered those would likely happen. (Even MWO they have weak legs; though hard to say if MWO would have done stable. They did that for the Dragons; but in doing so they basically gave it the gyro-profile of a 100 ton mech and said 'yep, its stable'.)
Truth be told, Megamek with mech quirks enabled has a lot of design quirks already on all the canon mechs; sadly there's no way to apply them directly to the mech [that I know of] without using Megamek itself and then saving the unit after (for HQ or otherwise). If there is a way it's probably in editing the text file about the unit itself.
Quickdraws, however, exclusively have "hyper extending actuators" ticked and nothing else. This is what led me to believe that it'd apply to the legs as well.
(Weak legs is for taking extra critical damage to yourself when kicking or performing DFA; Exposed Actuators makes it easier for infantry to attack it [which makes sense]. Both kind of make sense, but it doesn't really cover the easier to disable legs. Don't think any mech quirks specifically does something like reduce the BAR for legs or increase the likeliness that a specific part is going to get critted).
Dragons, for fun, have exclusive Stable.
Grand Dragons, just because I felt like looking... also have Stable.
King Crab 000 has Command Mech.
Awesome... has no quirks and is still awesome.
Gotta remember, Crit-rules don't always match the intent. For example it is proven again and again in BT builds that placement on the criticals doesn't necessarily reflect placement on the mech.
For example, the Behemoth.
On its CT there is a turret mounted with a single barrel. From this one barrel, two Gauss Rifles can fire, though they can be fired in the same turn they will rarely hit the same body part, meaning they are rarely fired at the same time (if ever). Still, despite the ST-mounted Gauss Rifles crits, it is explained that only their chargers are in the STs, each feed to the CT (which has no split crits I might add) to fire from the turret.
Is that what actually happens in BT? Only if we use the fluff, otherwise it from the BT crit assignment table it just magically has two gauss cannons on the side torsos and no CT turret.
About the stoned whino:
sarna said:
Weapons and Equipment
The design featured Large Pulse Lasers in each arm, twin Gauss Rifles in the torsos fired through the dorsal barrel, and an almost superfluous Small Pulse Laser located just below the cockpit.
In the actual fiction, it can't fire both gauss rifles at the same time. CT is pretty much the designator for "where the fusion engine and gyro are." Thus you don't really have to say that the feeds or whatever have to pass through the CT.
Quote
There's the Atlas K, C, and S-2 who each have a line of ten missile tubes on each side torso, but only an LRM-20 in the left torso according to the crit table that they feed from.
If you're getting your info on the number of and placement of missile tubes from the art ... um ... the art is on the BOTTOM of the stack as far as determining how things "actually are."
Quote
Then there's jumpjets. A Gyro has a series of spinning wheels, but no matter the centripetal force it cannot be explained how any mech built with 12 JJs on the left side can do a balanced jump that went off to that mech's left, when physics dictate that it should veer right (and not be balanced).
You're forgetting JJ control surfaces; and ... um ... WHAT design has 12 (or even 6) JJs, all on one side?
Quote
Often, JJs get assigned in places that conflict with the art. Sometimes a single jumpjet is on a mech with three thrusters, or 5 jumpjets on a mech with two thrusters. Personally if I were designing the game a jumpjet would have two criticals; the fuel-container which refuels after each jump and the jumpjet thruster array itself. The point, though, is that I've learned to take assignment crits to not be as literal as the paper takes it.
JJs work on compressed local atmosphere. The small amount of stored reaction mass they have is nowhere near large enough to need a storage section of it's own beyond the confines of the JJ assembly. JJs do NOT ... I repeate DO NOT ... work on plasma from the fusion engine.
Quote
Crit a JJ through the cockpit? You just disabled its controls or ruptured its feed line; it just happens they placed it near the hatch. BT has dozens of examples of unusual placement of objects. For example regardless of whether an object is mounted on the inside or the outside, it still consumes space on the assignment table. Detachable weapon arrays such as the Thunderbolt or Wolverine's guns (which have their own armor; and sadly are not in megamek) are treated this way, even though said guns have their own armor and are added to the to-hit table.
Um ... this is the art thing. The art has not and does not very often conform closely to "how things are" in the lore. It really just establishes a visual rule of thumb, with the over-riding concern seeming to be cool factor. Even at that, it seems to stomp on that thumb at times.
Handheld weapons - yes, they exist in the lore. No, MM doesn't seem to handle them.
Basically, the crit table is an abstraction to make things a lot easier and faster than making a custom crit table for every 'mech ever made.
Quote
Also, for the Nameless security industrial mech I'm using the ruleset for a Torso Mounted Cockpit, which puts Life Support in the Side Torsos, Torso Mounted Cockpit in the CT (and sensors), and another setup of sensors in the head. It is literally locked with the options as I'd prefer to take the sensors out of the CT (and I'd love to do without the consumption of 2 extra tons; seriously 2 extra tons to have the cockpit be in the CT! The locked placement of Torso Mounted cockpit and the one unit of Sensors prevents me from placing the Ejection seat in the torso. All this setup really tells me is that if things go south and the head is destroyed, while the mech is still functional I will not be able to eject as the mechanism for deploying the seat will have been destroyed.
I hate to beat the drum, but you can't eject from a CT cockpit. It's not possible. The cockpit is in there with the engine and gyro and behind all of the CT structure (meaning, for example, in a humanoid behind the ribcage). There is no design to get around this. In gameplay terms it is a balancing factor for the HUGE advantage that the torso cockpit has in protecting the pilot from dying or being KO'ed due to cockpit hits.
Quote
The CT itself is the cockpit, not the head. With the option Torso Mounted Cockpit ticked, the Head is considered a separate limb. For example it could be a large turret to mount AC/2s on or an LRM-10. This is why there are so many crit slots free in the head.
The CT isn't "the cockpit" for a Torso mounted 'pit. The CT is the section of the 'mech that a Torso mounte'd pit is in. The "head" is the area that the 'pit is normally in. Remove the 'pit and it's associated hardware (life support, etc) and you obviously have ... free space!
In the actual fiction, it can't fire both gauss rifles at the same time....
That is actually a point for any Gauss rifles.
When Phelan was taking his trials to be a Clan Warrior - Vlad was one of his opponents - and brought a mech using dual-gauss (an Executioner)
The book (2nd in the Blood of Kerensky if I remember) commented on how Vlad had both set up to fire at the pull of one trigger - but the mech could not fire both simultaneously - letting Phelan spread the damage from them slightly.
A potential balance mechanism that was suggested - but never made it into the game
(Though I can see why - it would have made Gauss far far less competitive than even the charge mechanic did - it still made me sad )
When Phelan was taking his trials to be a Clan Warrior - Vlad was one of his opponents - and brought a mech using dual-gauss (an Executioner)
The book (2nd in the Blood of Kerensky if I remember) commented on how Vlad had both set up to fire at the pull of one trigger - but the mech could not fire both simultaneously - letting Phelan spread the damage from them slightly.
A potential balance mechanism that was suggested - but never made it into the game
(Though I can see why - it would have made Gauss far far less competitive than even the charge mechanic did - it still made me sad )
It was a plot device that was never used again. Technically true with the way each weapon has to be rolled to hit on table top. Maximum Tech had an optional advanced rule for weapon grouping which bypassed that.
Maximum Tech: Revised Edition said:
Linking Weapons
Before the game begins, and also during the End Phase of any turn, a player may designate certain weapons to be linked on his BattleMechs or vehicles. Any or all weapons on a single unit can be linked, but they must be able to fire into the same firing arcs. A unit may also have more than one linked group of weapons. For example a Black Hawk Prime could linked the six medium lasers in its left arm as one group and the six medium lasers in its right arm as a second group. Linked weapons must be clearly indicated on a unit's record sheet.
Linked weapons must always be fired at the same target, though all linked weapons in a given group need not fire every time. The controlling player makes only one to-hit roll for the entire group of linked weapons. The to-hit number for the group is determined according to the worst range and other modifiers in the group. If the roll fails, all the inked weapons miss. If succeeds, all the linked weapons hit. Hit location is determined normally for each individual weapon in the linked group.
Basically, the crit table is an abstraction to make things a lot easier and faster than making a custom crit table for every 'mech ever made.
Is my overall point. It's an abstraction, not necessarily "the way things are."
With the ejection seat crit in the CT for the old SM-Temp and the ejection seat crit in the Head for the Torso Mounted SM-Temp, both mechs were perfectly able to eject just fine.
A crit to the seat (which is not just a 0.5 ton chair, as a crit to it should instantaneously kill the pilot if that were the case) in the CT of the head-cockpit SM-Temp disabled the ability to eject. Pilot lived and had no injury checks for it.
A crit to the seat in the head of the Torso Cockpit version disabled the ability to eject. Again, nothing happened to the pilot.
For 0.5 tons it's easy to reason you get more than a chair. You have said small charges to blast the hatch open. You have a mechanism to activate said explosives. You have an amount of propellant to launch the chair. You have quite a bit of other things, too, all of which come free of tonnage in a standard mech but for an industrial mech you must add in that extra bit of tonnage and crits. All it really tells me, is that unlike a Battlemech, an Industrial mech has to create and attach these things, and that a shot placed wherever the "Ejection Seat Crit" is placed will disable any ability to eject from the mech.
For a real world example, you get into a car accident. The air bag goes off. It protects you. Now because it's in the steering wheel, if the steering wheel is damaged you lose the air bag. What if the air bag was in the dashboard instead? What if it was in the ceiling of the vehicle? What if it emerges from the door instead? That's just one example with different placements of the bag. An Airbag by itself weighs approximately 5 lbs. The entire system for two bags weighs between 20 and 25 lbs when including all parts.
The Airbag system is more than just the Airbags themselves. There is something that fills that bag, and that something isn't located in the steering wheel. What if the mechanism that fills the bag is, itself, damaged? It is connected to the airbags; both of them. But it is not located in the steering wheel, or behind the glove compartment. Still, if that is damaged, no air bags.
Just as the Airbag system is more than just the bags themselves, so is the Ejection Seat is more than the chair, and those other crucial components can in theory be elsewhere. Damage to the primary crash sensor or the safing sensor can disable the airbags without ever touching the bags or their containers.
Now, far as the jumpjets, there are designs with 5+ jumpjets. Doesn't mean they get 5+ thrusters mounted to them. And you can make a mech with 12+ jumpjets on one side. You can also take a mech, destroy the jumpjets on one side, and be just fine. You can have jumpjets in exclusively the legs (Summoner anyone?) and still manage to fly just fine. I've ultimately deduced that "Jumpjet" doesn't really reflect the number of thrusters the mech would or should have, or their placement to truly matter. For example a jumpjet can be crit from the front side, if it is sitting on your back. What happens is a through armor critical damages the device or its storage tank, disabling it. In theory if you have a number of jumpjets, they may as well just be additional 'storage' tanks for more jumpjet mass. How else would you explain multiple 2 ton jumpjets on a mech less than 13 meters tall?
That's why if I were to have designed the tabletop game, I would have had the thruster and the jumpjet storage tank as separate. That way if the storage tanks are damaged you'd just have less overall burn between your reaction mass tanks where if the jumpjet thrusters are damaged you'd have more difficulty controlling it (and it could then make a bit more sense when critted, too). Here, if the thing is crit it's completely up to the imagination if they got the reaction tank or the thruster itself. Since their placement doesn't really match up in most cases, I find it simply easier to assume reaction mass storages.
-------------
Back to the ejection seat, losing said ability to eject due to head damage even though the pilot is in the torso-mounted cockpit really adds an air of desperation.
However, if it could have been mounted in the CT (instead of those damn sensors), then losing the ejection seat crit would make me wonder "If my chair's destroyed then why the hell am I still alive? Wait, did airing out that fart just as the AC rounds ripped through my chair save me?"
Where losing it due to damage to a related area, but not directly where I'm sitting, tells me that the ejection system has been damaged. The hatch won't blow open! Or the propellant isn't working! Wait did something mechanical that the lever was hooked up to get dislodged in that last shot? "Just pull the lever," "This is the beeping lever!"
With the ejection seat crit in the CT for the old SM-Temp and the ejection seat crit in the Head for the Torso Mounted SM-Temp, both mechs were perfectly able to eject just fine.
Uh ... no. Yes, we agree that the crit table is abstract. But it's not THAT abstract.
Again, "CT" = "where the engine and gyro are" "Head" means "where the cockpit is." So "torso mounted" = *IN with the engine and gyro. Unless otherwise noted or producing a logical impossiblility, the crit-table DOES give you location information.
For instance, a TC mounted 'pit in a marauder/catapault type mech would actually have you *behind* the engine and the gyro.
In a bipedal, you're *under* the engine and the gyro, sandwiched in over the pelvis type stuff and over or *in with* the equipment that handes the torso-twisting. Etc. You're also *behind* the "rib cage" & etc. that *supports the entire torso structure.*
Quote
A crit to the seat (which is not just a 0.5 ton chair, as a crit to it should instantaneously kill the pilot if that were the case) in the CT of the head-cockpit SM-Temp disabled the ability to eject. Pilot lived and had no injury checks for it.
A crit to the seat in the head of the Torso Cockpit version disabled the ability to eject. Again, nothing happened to the pilot.
For 0.5 tons it's easy to reason you get more than a chair. You have said small charges to blast the hatch open. You have a mechanism to activate said explosives. You have an amount of propellant to launch the chair. You have quite a bit of other things, too, all of which come free of tonnage in a standard mech but for an industrial mech you must add in that extra bit of tonnage and crits. All it really tells me, is that unlike a Battlemech, an Industrial mech has to create and attach these things, and that a shot placed wherever the "Ejection Seat Crit" is placed will disable any ability to eject from the mech.
Of course the ejection seat option includes the blow-out panels - I never meant or assumed otherwise - you might notice I had already talked about the blow out panels and such in direct connection with ejection. This isn't the reason I disagreed with you.
Quote
For a real world example, you get into a car accident. The air bag goes off. It protects you. Now because it's in the steering wheel, if the steering wheel is damaged you lose the air bag. What if the air bag was in the dashboard instead? What if it was in the ceiling of the vehicle? What if it emerges from the door instead? That's just one example with different placements of the bag. An Airbag by itself weighs approximately 5 lbs. The entire system for two bags weighs between 20 and 25 lbs when including all parts.
Here's why I disagreed - in a torso mounted cockpit it's impossible to eject because the engine, gyro, and all of their supporting structures are physically in the way. To be "on top of" the engine/gyro stack (in a humanoid) or "in front of" (like a marauder) you are in the ... cockpit area.
Tactical Operations Pg 300--301 said:
Torso Mounted Cockpit
R&d Start date: 3044 (Federated Commonwealth)
prototype design and production: 3053 (Federated Commonwealth)
The most recent attempt to move the cockpit from the most structurally vulnerable part of a ’Mech to its more heavily armored center torso offered the pilot added physical protection, but remained laced with other hazards, not the least of which included ejection difficulties, dangerous proximity to the engine and the paradoxically increased likelihood of suffering physical damage in combat. For these reasons, the concept remains prototypical.
Rules Level: Experimental
tech Base (Ratings): Both (E/X-X-F)
game Rules: A MechWarrior using a torso-mounted cockpit receives no pilot damage from hits to the torso area where the cockpit is placed, though ammunition explosions, excess heat, falling damage, and cockpit destruction may affect the warrior as normal. A +1 to-hit modifier applies on all Piloting Skill rolls made by a warrior using a torso-mounted cockpit (due to its cramped space). It is impossible to eject from a torso-mounted cockpit. ...
Also, strictly in gameplay terms, if memory serves, when MW:Unbound came out, it did originally allow TC cockpit ejection, and it was utterly game-breaking and very quicky was changed. with a TCpit your pilot can't be knocked out. Pilots are extremely hard (compared to a lucky cockpit hit) to damage because they are behind the thickest armor on the 'mech; and you get an extra sensor hit to boot. Also, good players will build in enough extra cooling and find a better cooling suit, along with using CASE or dropping explosive weapons and ammo, all to offset the downsides as much as possible.
Speaking of another reason why TC pits can be a serious boon: one otherwise cheap way to get good salvage is to spam a targeted 'mech with SRMs, 2 damage a piece. If you toss enough of them you can get 6 hits on the cockpit (kill the pilot) very quickly, and just about anything can carry SRM's. Even poor bloody infantry can carry the things. Smart players and good pilots simply don't get in range of anything carrying a lot of SRMs. I had to learn this the hard way - never go near a hardened bunker full of grenadier battle armors. 4 srm 4s hitting one mech in one turn is BAAAD news. You'll be leaving the enemy some easily repaired salvage; just bring a wet/dry shop vac to clean up.
There is, however, one serious downside: when you lose your 'mech you lose your pilot the overwhelming majority of the time... the CT location takes seven (7) times as many hits as the cockpit location does, and all of your damge transfer goes, ultimately, through the CT, so once the CT or side torso armor IS penetrated, you die pretty quickly.
It's kid of a berzerker type tradeoff - OMG uber damage soaking ability in certain situations, but ... um ... you pay for it.
Now, far as the jumpjets, there are designs with 5+ jumpjets. Doesn't mean they get 5+ thrusters mounted to them. And you can make a mech with 12+ jumpjets on one side. You can also take a mech, destroy the jumpjets on one side, and be just fine. You can have jumpjets in exclusively the legs (Summoner anyone?) and still manage to fly just fine. I've ultimately deduced that "Jumpjet" doesn't really reflect the number of thrusters the mech would or should have, or their placement to truly matter. For example a jumpjet can be crit from the front side, if it is sitting on your back. What happens is a through armor critical damages the device or its storage tank, disabling it. In theory if you have a number of jumpjets, they may as well just be additional 'storage' tanks for more jumpjet mass. How else would you explain multiple 2 ton jumpjets on a mech less than 13 meters tall?
Um, you do realize that none of the factors you've mentioned require your conclusion? Yes, I'm being retentive, but a deduction (instead of a guess) means "required conclusion." Yes, I can't stand to watch either of the sherlock tv series. The writers of those shows wouldn't know a deduction from a guess if it bit their legs off.
Yes, each "jumpjet" crit on the table DOES represent at least one thruster port, regardless of where that port "comes out" in relation to where it exactly is on the crit table, for the simple reason that JJs create a controlled explosion of plasma and direct it out of a port. Nowhere that I have seen (and I've seen quite a bit) mentions anything like creating a plasma flow and than splitting it out of multiple ports or anything like that.
That said: JJ crits in the legs we know DO come out in the legs; CT to ct, etc.
Again, JJS do not work on stored fuel when they are in atmosphere. They only have a small amount of stored reaction mass. This reserve is specifically mentioned as being "small," not enough to achieve orbit, etc. Hitting the "small" stored reaction mass chamber in a JJ won't take the JJ out. 'Mechs only use that reaction mass in a vacuum. The vast, overwhelming, huge majority of the time they use local atmoshpere, and they also don't use plasma from the fusion engine.
Unless you're in a vacuum, jumpjets do not work on stored reaction mass.
I'm trying to refrain from quoting huge block sections of the offical rules, but all of this can be backed up from the sources. It is how the fiction works.
Something else to consider: Regardless, if You lose all your ports on "one side" and you can still get to where you want to be (as even you've said). Golly, is that even possible?
The things we know of that can do it: the Gyro, first and foremost. Control surfaces secondary. Maybe you've assumed that the ports are fixed and can only fire in one direction, thus not being able to equalize themselves, greatly helping the Gyro...?
About physics: BT isn't "real life in the future." It's escapist fiction with semi-hard physics; so of course you can break it if you toss enough variables at it, which is wholly beside the entire point of BT. However, if you're going to "break it" you should make sure you get all the stuff right. Most people don't. For that matter, BT is intentionally a future of the 80s to mid 90's, and there's nothing wrong with that. Something else most people either don't know, don't consider, or just don't care about.
Any gaming system can be broken. It's inherent in the nature of gaming systems. Even the so-called "laws of physics" are routinely broken. Go pick up the older physics books. It's simply a matter of what you're willing to personally accept and what you aren't.
(I haven't read your post yet PHT as I figure that like many of my own posts it'd require some time to read and process. I will soon; at the moment however I'm just passing through.)
(Read it finally. And I'm aware of the physical differences. My point is already made in this post so I won't need to reiterate it.)
So far I've been able to recreate the Torso Mounted Upgrade in Skunkwerks. The only thing is the tonnages are different, despite every bit of tonnage being identical. The mech, equipment, etc. is at identical tonnage. But in Skunkwerks I'm unable to allocate 0.5 tons to a CASE.
Skunkwerks, which does not allow me to choose where to place many of the items, has also determined that an Ejection Seat will go into the head even for a Torso Mounted Cockpit.
It's yielded very cool results. Though I have found this from the TacOps thingy...
Quote
Rules Level: Experimental
Available To: BM, IM
Tech Base (Ratings): Both (E/X-X-F)
Game Rules: A MechWarrior using a torso-mounted cockpit receives no pilot damage from hits to the torso area where the cockpit is placed, though ammunition explosions, excess heat, falling damage, and cockpit destruction may affect the warrior as normal. A +1 to-hit modifier applies on all Piloting Skill rolls made by a warrior using a torso-mounted cockpit (due to its cramped space). It is impossible to eject from a torso-mounted cockpit.
Because the torso-mounted cockpit requires additional sensors, a ’Mech using this system may survive 2 sensor critical hits and still perform weapon attacks. Instead of the standard modifiers from sensor damage, the first sensor hit incurs a +2 to-hit modifier to all weapon attacks, while the second increases this to a +4 modifier. If both sensor hits are in the head, the +4 modifier at the second sensor hit also applies to all Physical Attacks and Piloting Skill rolls, as the ‘Mech is effectively blinded. Three sensor hits (or more) completely blind a ’Mech with a torso-mounted cockpit, rendering all Weapon Attacks impossible and applying a +4 modifier to all Piloting Skill target numbers.
Finally, because of proximity to the engine, warriors using a torso-mounted cockpit suffer more severe heat effects in the event of life support damage. If a unit with a torso-mounted cockpit takes a life support critical hit, the MechWarrior suffers 1 point of damage for every turn the ’Mech overheats by 1 to 14 points, and 2 points of damage for every turn the unit overheats by 15 points or more. This MechWarrior heat effect replaces the standard MechWarrior heat effects.
For a particular set of obvious reasons I am likely going to ignore this for this specific chassis. The risk of losing ejection with incredible ease in addition to a difficult ejection have proven to be extremely valuable for a plot standpoint.
Now, my tests have only had a single death caused by mech destruction; that one was by ammo explosion (after the CASE was critted; funny enough). Engine-caused destruction, even those with critical mass, have only trapped the pilot inside in testing thus far.
This would point in favor of having an ejection seat/ability completely unnecessary as 'ejecting' unimportant for the concept of preserving important characters since odds are super-strong that they won't die as a result.
On the other hand, however, while there is a certain drama in knowing that you can't eject no matter what, there is an even stronger drama generated when you lose the ability to eject while in a firefight that is going downhill very quickly. This, combined with the intended design (where they can just climb out), makes the ejection seat rather favorable.
The opposing option is to 'remove' the Torso-Mounted Cockpit trait which would make the 'ejection seat' completely legal (as it's not "impossible" to eject from a standard cockpit). What I dislike about this choice is that the 'Head' becomes the cockpit and even if we fluff it to be in the chest, we have a 'head' in the chest taking damage and the pilot reacting to that damage...meaning that there isn't a separate crit system for the physical head, as the 'crit' head is now the cockpit. This only adds some serious confusion and frankly the result sort of pulls me out of the experience rather than into it.
So, I will continue to be using the Ejection Seat and the Torso Mounted Cockpit on the humanoid patlabor-inspired security mech. The reasoning, if for nothing else, is the drama of it. Worst comes to worst I'll change 3035 to 3053+ and pretend they're new. Though, according to Skunkwerks I won't be doing it with a CASE for my ammo. (It's a shame Tear Gas SRMs do not function in Megamek. It would make things so much easier).
There's mention of a number of interesting things, including the Catapult's ejection seat rotating sideways and then launching it out the back. And the King Crab's tendency to blow a chunk out of the engine and launch the pilot Through said engine to eject! The "first" torso mounted cockpits from the "not mounted on a neck" definition rather than the crit table definition. The main difference is that everything related to the cockpit is contained in one area and there is transplast (a translucent/transparent metal alloy used as a 'windshield') rather than an enclosed box with monitors and the various components contained outside of it rather than within.
I started on page 6, but it seems it is wanted to eject from the rear where the armored hatch blows out the back allowing it to fly out the rear. This strikes me as very unlikely compared to my scenario, as the engine is likely below, beside, or behind the cockpit.
In front or above the pilot makes no sense (for the shape of my mech; too many moving parts in the pelvis between hips and torso twist. It being an industrial mech means it, to the best of what I can find, does not possess Myomers [mech muscles] and instead is more likely to use hydraulics or pneumatics which is why the industrial chassis seems to be heavier).
In my case I'm picturing the engine is either below (as most internal workings art of Battlemechs depict engines in the pelvis, stomach or rear-side of the mech) or behind the cockpit. So the ejection would blast the head away and, if necessary, the external viewing hatch (above chest, between it and in front of the 'throat' of the neck) in order to allow ejection from the top.
I have difficult ejection to complicate it, and the head is easy enough to damage which can jam it from being able to permit ejection. Now if I can just figure out how to deliberately climb out of the mech on command.
The on going problem I'm having from tests (other than the ruleset TMC version of the mech is getting slaughtered very easily) is that I'm losing life support and/or sensors. Sensors adds to the difficulty of making hits, that's fine and good. Life support is really draining the pilots physically.
------
Design Considerations regarding the Patlabor-inspired Security Mech currently dubbed 'SM-Temp TMC' (Torso Mounted Cockpit).
One consideration was raising the SM-Temp from 20 tons to 25 tons.
From what I can see, I would get an additional 3 tons to play with in doing so (as the engine goes from 2 tons to 3 tons going from a 40 ICE to a 50 ICE and the structure gains an additional ton).
This would give me very little, but some, playing room.
One such thing is to upgrade to a 75 ICE for an additional ton, leaving me with 2 tons to play with. These 2 tons would allow me to slap on the Environmental Sealing that PHT so eagerly wants me to have (though this leaves a lack of explanation should the pilot be forced to drive with his seat in the elevated position admist the smoke and tear gas, other than maybe a gas mask which would be handy).
Other possibilities include a second kind of ammo, additional armor, or making the more advanced traits of the SM-BladeGun (another 'nameless' copy of the same unit fitting a rifle), which were part of the original-original concept of the very first design.
These 'original ' features included a Searchlight, Recon camera (to represent a camera in the head; not necessary now), Remote Sensor Dispenser and a single ton of Communications Equipment.
This, genuinely, seems like the best course of action. However this increase in tonnage would mean an increase in other aspects from a fluff perspective.
The alternative is as I have done with SM-BladeGun, is to keep the mech at 20 tons but change the heavy ICE engine for a Fuel Cell engine.
The gain of doing so allows me to mount all of the above mentioned equipment [except the unnecessary Recon Camera and the 1 ton Communication Equipment' due to tonnage restrictions. Makes me wish there was a 0.5 ton version). This even allows me to keep the slight engine power upgrade, or to choose an additional 0.5 tons of commercial grade armor to throw on another 12 points.
The downfall here is greatly limiting the logistical longevity of the humanoid units in the field that are meant to last longer than the chicken-legged swat unit Nin Kei. This is merely a fluff issue with zero-actual impact on the likely performance in Megamek (other than I have no idea at all if fuel cell engine explosions would kill the pilot as ICE explosions do not). However, it could cause some potential "Cinema Sins" in terms of the story in claiming that it's been in the field for far longer than it could possibly run.
Removing the spot wielder.
(Just intended to find "Shtbot" saying "Welding! Welding!! I like to do Welding!" but this was... so...so much better even if longer).
In either case I've been considering removing the spot wielder. The original purpose of this I imagined to be related to be able to either wield things shut or cut them open. This has a wide variety of uses in the field, from 'cutting' another pilot out of a unit or sealing something shut. Even construction applications by doing an emergency makeshift repair.
This would give me an additional 0.5 tons (a Spot Welder is 2 tons; its replacement would be a Retractable Blade which is 1.5 tons). The 0.5 tons could be used to make up for any defficiencies in the changes in either considered course. It would also allow a left hand actuator, which would decrease the piloting strain in 'getting up' with a 'missing hand actuator'.
-------------------
On the pilots: After testing more runs, I've decided to modify the extreme stats of Ota and Noa.
Noa Izumi (Izumi Noa) :
Spoiler
Gender: Female.
Age: 20 (as of 3035)
Original planned stats (by the end of the story; note that 'lower' = better, and 0 = unparralled. 8 = Untrained.)
Piloting/mech: 1
Gunnery/Mech: 7
Piloting/ground vehicle: 6
Gunnery/Battlesuit: 6
Gunnery/Protomech: 7 (for completeness)
Small arms: 6
Technician / Mech: 8 (This goes up to 10 for untrained; she loves her machine and polishes it, but can't do any of the complicated repairs).
AsTech: 7 (Technician's Assistant; gives a lot of feedback about her unit's perfomance.)
Negotiation: 7 (with 10 being untrained; useful for reasoning with suspects).
Abilities: Dodge (allows the pilot to make a dodge manuever instead of a physical attack and is declared during the weapons phase.) Melee Specialist (increases and decreases potential damage dealt during melee combat). Melee Master (to be 'earned' during the course of her development; allows the pilot to do an additional melee attack within the same turn). Multi-Tasker (being considered. Reduces secondary target modifiers by 1.) Weathered (being considered to be earned: Pilot does not suffer the initial reduction to hit a target under weather conditions [intended for melee but affects all]). Sensor Geek (a pilot with this quirk gets it two points easier to detect unseen things using scanners).
Noa's stats are intended for a pilot who prefers to disable her targets with melee as opposed to the use of guns (which could kill either the suspects, her support crew's command car or civilians). Her strong piloting skills are meant to reflect someone who practices daily with complicated tasks that take incredible precision and then trying to beat her own times. This is meant to come at the cost of her gunnery skills, which are absolutely abysmal.
Default pilot stats:
Piloting 5 / Gunnery 4
Current planned pilot stats:
Piloting 1 / Gunnery 7
New changes to incur to the plan:
Piloting/Mech: 2 (5-3)
Gunnery: 8 (4+3)
This simply transfers 3 points of gunnery skill to allow an improvement of 3 points of piloting skill from the "average" Inner Sphere pilot setup.
----
Ota Isao (Isao Ota) :
Spoiler
Some cut and pasting was done to fit 'all' of the currently logged history fits. I'll be replacing "CPK-19" entries with whatever name the SM-Temp TMC gets.
Gender: Male.
Age: 26 (as of 3035)
Original planned stats (by the end of the story; note that 'lower' = better, and 0 = unparralled. 8 = Untrained.)
Piloting/mech: 6
Gunnery/Mech: 2
Piloting/ground vehicle: 6
Gunnery/Vehicle: 1
Gunnery/Spacecraft: 5
Gunnery/Battlesuit: 4
Gunnery/Protomech: 4 (for completeness)
Small arms: 1
Negotiation: 10 (with 10 being untrained; useful for reasoning with suspects). (As you can imagine, Ota is terrible at this).
Abilities: Dodge (debating on this; it seems like something I should have on many pilots) Pain Resistance (Damage from ammo explosions is reduced; included to reflect this) Sniper (Being considered as something to 'Earn', however the gun-ho personality may not fit it). Gunnery specialist; Ballistic Specialization (-1 difficulty in usage of ballistic weaponry and +1 to difficulty to using any other weapons). Natural Aptitude; Gunnery (being considered; just has 3 rolls and keeps the best 2.) Edge; Knock Out (Allows a reroll for pilot blackout if a specific number is hit; helps in resistance to blackouts).
Ota is known for being a clutz. He often isn't very situationally aware, can be very blockheaded or even stubborn. Though he can get rather creative in how to accomplish something, it predictably tends to involve some use of a firearm. He earned the nickname "Insurance Nightmare" when he managed to acrue over 3 million cbills in damages on a machine that costs only a fraction of that price. The nickname is jokingly entered in as his Callsign on paperwork. His piloting skills are lackluster compared to the typical mechwarrior. He can do basic manuevering and his superiors don't foolishly expect more out of him.
Where he shines however is with a firearm. Whether on foot, on a vehicle or in a SecurityMech, his aim could rival a basic clanner. An almost religious knowledge of ballistic weaponry and a boisterous sense of duty (when duty involves firing guns) have helped in this. However this obsession extends exclusively to ballistic weapons and while he also loves things that go boom, no one in their right mind would trust him with explosive missiles.
Default pilot stats:
Piloting 5 / Gunnery 4
Current planned pilot stats:
Piloting 6 / Gunnery 2
New changes being considered:
Piloting/Mech: 6 (5+1)
Gunnery: 3 (4-1)
Reason: At the original gunnery of 2, Ota was perhaps too good when considering the specializations modifiers and such.
Under the considered change, Ota rivals the typical Clanner with a gunnery skill of 3. When using ballistic weapons, his specialization is buffed into a skill of 2, and when using non-ballistic weapons it is debuffed to a skill of 4 [the typical war-hardened IS pilot gunnery skill).
Using the +/- system to redistribute skill points rather than feeding numbers may not feel as 'dynamic', but it gives a more balanced feel to things.
And yes. The names and basic traits of those two characters are directly from Patlabor as sort of a tribute. At first it was just because they were polar opposites and easily replicated in Battletech's system even on just the most basic of BT rules. Now I'm sort of attached to them.
(The sad irony is this 'quick visit' wound up taking about 6 hours to fill out.)
OH ... patchwork armor on a battlemech allows you to double the armor on your cockpit by using hardened armor on the cockpit. 18 (vs 9) armor and 1/36 chance to hit adds up quite nicely. Not sure where in the timeline hardened armor came into use and from what I know you're now allowed to armor components behind hardened armor. That means your cockpit could take 18 total damage, have less chance of being penetrated, AND the FIRST hit that would penetrate AND hit the cockpit crit would be stopped by armoring the cockpit slot. Maybe you could even add the "cowl" quirk if you're going to be really overkill.
... and I just checked - you can do this with industrial 'mechs.
OH ... patchwork armor on a battlemech allows you to double the armor on your cockpit by using hardened armor on the cockpit. 18 (vs 9) armor and 1/36 chance to hit adds up quite nicely. Not sure where in the timeline hardened armor came into use and from what I know you're now allowed to armor components behind hardened armor. That means your cockpit could take 18 total damage, have less chance of being penetrated, AND the FIRST hit that would penetrate AND hit the cockpit crit would be stopped by armoring the cockpit slot. Maybe you could even add the "cowl" quirk if you're going to be really overkill.
... and I just checked - you can do this with industrial 'mechs.
OH ... patchwork armor on a battlemech allows you to double the armor on your cockpit by using hardened armor on the cockpit. 18 (vs 9) armor and 1/36 chance to hit adds up quite nicely. Not sure where in the timeline hardened armor came into use and from what I know you're now allowed to armor components behind hardened armor. That means your cockpit could take 18 total damage, have less chance of being penetrated, AND the FIRST hit that would penetrate AND hit the cockpit crit would be stopped by armoring the cockpit slot. Maybe you could even add the "cowl" quirk if you're going to be really overkill.
... and I just checked - you can do this with industrial 'mechs.
Hardened armor does not exist at the time of the Star League and is only in prototype stages at the NAIS by 3047. Only entered common usage outside of experimental 'Mechs in the 32nd century. At 15k c-bills a ton it is hardly timeline or backwater world police force budget friendly.
I'm zipping through but yeah, I was aware of patchwork armor but whenever I think of that, I think of the Cattlemaster with plates of random armor slapped on with random colors, some of it having pieces welded over other pieces, an LRM-20 bolted onto the shoulder with wires running down the side and duct-taped there, with a mech-sized hoe in hand.
From what I understood of hardened armor it was very rare. The movement penalties it is supposed to place is also a big thing.
I'll be back to read stuff in detail a bit later today!
On a side note I asked Lordred to prepare a team of leopard dropships, mechwarriors and such in Megamek HQ with pilots that have various traits. I'll be using a Davion team, dunno what he'll use. Anyway, we're gonna do a community warfare "Invasion" style mission with one side attacking and the other defending, reinforcements, gun emplacements, artillery, vehicles and infantry, etc. Tonnage limit only, no mech limit. It'll be done after a few months of 'maintenance work' on the mechs with a mixture of mech-techs, astechs, etc, so the mechs will be in some state of disrepair. When we do it we'll try to get a summary here as well as the R&R involved.
Also figured out how to get Megamek HQ to automatically run all the costs involved instead of making me manually do it. Yay!
Nathan Foxbane, on 19 December 2014 - 09:21 PM, said:
Hardened armor does not exist at the time of the Star League and is only in prototype stages at the NAIS by 3047. Only entered common usage outside of experimental 'Mechs in the 32nd century. At 15k c-bills a ton it is hardly timeline or backwater world police force budget friendly.
Yes, I know.
I mentioned it because KON appears to be loosly following the fiction.
So yeah I went back in read up. It seems I pretty much covered it on my own though and didn't see anything new to address (I could make a mention on jumpjets under Page 24-25 of Strategic Operations can have stored fuel in a liquid storage tank, with each ton of fuel being 40 fuel points which would be more than enough to allow 40 jumps for a single jumpjet, but that's splitting hairs).
Naturally it is specified in the rules that they can only be mounted in torso and leg locations, though since I had considered the 'Head' on the Nin Kei to be part of the torso even as a standard cockpit, to me that would be part of the torso.
Of real interest is one thing often forgotten in rules: Apparently the number of jumpjets you can carry are supposed to be limited.
Quote
The maximum number of jets a ’Mech may mount depends on its ground MPs and the type of jets used, as shown on the Jump Jets Table below. A ’Mech with standard jets, for example, may have as many jets as it does Walking MP. The weight for each mounted jump jet is given in the Jump Jets Table below (to the left of the slash).
Page 51 of the TechManual.
And I was about to say I was confused by "Ground MP" as to whether it's cruising or max. Though after copy/pasting it seems that "Walking MP" has jumped out at me.
In other words, most of the mechs in MWO wouldn't have the JJ counts they have here. Suppose that would make things easier far as mounting 'thrusters' on the backs of mechs.
Most of the custom mechs I've seen floating around have blatantly omitted this one.
But as mentioned I took out the endo steel (truth be told it's only giving me 0.5 tons) and ditched the jumpjet (thinking about it, it's more dramatic to crush a fence than hop over it, and I can 'climb' rather than jump even with 'minimal' arms provided the slope is shallow enough).
---------
Merry Christmas / Happy Hanukkah (sp?) for those it applies to.
Moving on.
It seems that Davions have the honor of being in the Megamek CW mission that I'll be putting in here when it happens.
Funny enough I was thinking of using them, but Lordred called them.
This leaves me with a choice (for 3049) between Marik (unlikely due to the red tape and politics), Liao or Kurita.
From there it's a question of whether the Davions are defending or attacking.
The other thing is what DropShips to use. Leopard DropShips are likely due to the fact that they are in MWO, and thus a specific visual reference is already in people's minds when they read that a Leopard DropShip came in to drop off mechs. But as every faction has its own distinct stuff, it stands to reason that DropShips more native to the factions might be used here. (So a list of DropShips to factions would be awesome).
-------
I'm debating on how to setup the offense and defense.
At the moment, the plan is to use a series of 3 to 5 maps to represent one team's progressive invasion, with the match/etc. covering one of multiple simultaneous operations within a campaign akin to Damocles. These will include various targets varying from map to map. I'm hoping to include an area populated with a minor civilian presence, whether in an attempt to deal with local leadership or due to an operation having gone off course (i.e. pilots get lost, communications jammed, misinformation, etc).
For defenses, I'm thinking of using a local area defense BV limit to cover turrets, conventional fighters and tanks.
Defending 'Mechs to be deployed by the DropShips limited instead by tonnage, and offending units also by tonnage, with the 'Mechs being global (say you get X number of tons, that's it, for all maps involved. If you can extract units after a defeat, you can return them to combat in the next map [assuming attackers win, if defenders win the invasion stops], so what you send out to defend can screw or support you later).
No time to make field repairs unless they can be managed under X hours, and partial repair jobs are immediately terminated in the condition they are in when the next phase continues. Defenders, if sending units to areas with better facilities, can use them. Attackers (since I haven't found a mobile field base that can conduct repairs in Megamek) will be doing literal field repairs or patchjobs in the dropship, which would mostly be reloading ammunition and little else.
(In other words, damaged received for the most part is damaged retained when the mission continues).
Un-evacuated Civilian population - likely to use a BV here too. Depending on an 'advanced notice' decision or roll to determine how 'aware' of an impending attack the defending team is.
Civilian population to be controlled by bots for simplicity.
Debating on local defenses being bot or player controlled.
Dropships and mechs to be controlled by players.
Pilots to have Megamek HQ generated skills found in the 'hiring' process with a limit of Veteran and Elite pilots.
Vehicles/defenses are likely to have standard basic rules 4/5 users.
Out of the 35 pilots I currently have, only 3 are elites and 13 are green.
Names and genders to be redistributed to characters through Megamek's 'random' name/gender distribution, with male to female ratios and naming conventions chosen according to the specific factions.
For simplicity, considering no customizations beyond ammo-type changes. Possible exception for a single mech to represent an elite unit.
Double Blind will be used if possible; depends on whether or not signing into the game with a second but minimized connection as an observer can provide a detailed transcript in the end. Otherwise we'll be combining our transcripts.
Individual Initiative will be used to create a more dynamic, semi-real time experience (rather than player A moves everything, player B reacts).
I'm genuinely looking forward to this.
--------
Currently for the sake of mentioning, the 3 randomly generated elites I have are:
(Names/Genders not yet randomized)
26 years old. Skills: Manuevering Ace, Oblique Attacker. (Pilot: 3, Gun: 2, SA: 5, Tactics: +3)
30 years old. Skills: Sandblaster. (Pilot: 3, Gun: 2, SA: 4)
39 years old. Skills: Sniper. (Pilot: 2, Gun: 1, SA: 4, Tactics: +4)
Of random interest, while most of my pilots have no skills I found this little gem that made me laugh hidden among my veterans.
30 years old. Skills: Dodge, Hopping Jack. (Pilot: 4, Gun: 3).
Reading up on the skill... Evidently Megamek gave me a poptart.
--------
We're still setting this up, of course. We could easily end up adding some stuff and having to re-roll the pilots altogether.
Still, to be given a poptart. The ironies.
Random question:
Anyone actually know why F is better than A in terms of...well, everything?
When I first started using Megamek HQ I thought "F" was failing and "A" was exceptional, so when all my mechs were "F" I was like "I'm fixing everything as best as I can with top-level god mode technicians what more do you want!?"
Anyway some weeks later I tried it again (this was last year mind you), and I realized that the condition of a neglected mech went from C and "downgraded to B".
I'm reminded of this because the tech level of an ICE is B and the tech level of a fuel cell is D, where D is higher tech than B.
Also how do I read the A-D-B-E-E thingy of resource availability? (Example letters.)
Using the skeletal structure of a few different birds, I sort of figured out a stance and come down to two proposed leg layouts.
Then of these two, a few variations that are + / - an additional 'flexible' piece, another actuator that would count as one of the existing ones (likely foot).
Most of your attention should be on the upper left panel of each of these. Each cube represents either an actuator, point of flexibility, or the biggest one represents how far the 'back' would extend. A pair of cubes represents the arm mount location, still more represent the legs at each joint.
The highest points, coming from the rear-ends of the pelvis, are where the hips connect at this time. It is not yet determined if that will be at the back or the center of the pelvis. In either case, the 'torso' pivot will be in front of that. Much of the mech's weight will be toward the back, and balanced where the feet stand.
In each version, you can see the proportions of each part of the leg changes drastically.
In addition, undepicted is whether the ankle is simply connected to the foot akin to how a bird's is... or if there is a secondary ankle, to have the flexibility of a human foot. Both have repercussions when it comes to converting to and from track-movement-mode.
The mech's design needs to be able to make the transition without the use of arms.
Furthermore, I've deduced the tracks need to be on the calves, with the remainder of the leg 'lowering' the body to about center above the legs while 'rolling'. This, in turn, also makes getting up animations easier as all the mech really needs to do is get on its calves and from there it's easy... The difficulty is getting onto its calves from a face-down position in the event of tripping.
Random question:
Anyone actually know why F is better than A in terms of...well, everything?
When I first started using Megamek HQ I thought "F" was failing and "A" was exceptional, so when all my mechs were "F" I was like "I'm fixing everything as best as I can with top-level god mode technicians what more do you want!?"
Anyway some weeks later I tried it again (this was last year mind you), and I realized that the condition of a neglected mech went from C and "downgraded to B".
I'm reminded of this because the tech level of an ICE is B and the tech level of a fuel cell is D, where D is higher tech than B.
Also how do I read the A-D-B-E-E thingy of resource availability? (Example letters.)
UNIVERSAL SOCIO-INDUSTRIAL LEVEL REFERENCE
Technological Sophistication
A High-tech world. Advanced research centers and universities; best medical care; cutting-edge microelectronics industry.
B Advanced world. Access to many new technologies; hosts universities; good medical care available (though lacking in most cutting-edge medical tech); basic microelectronics industry.
C Moderately advanced world. Average local education and medical care; minimal microelectronics industry.
D Lower-tech world. Poor educational system; medical care equivalent to 21st-22nd century; nonexistent microelectronics industry (except possibly in isolated regions run by private concerns).
F Primitive world. Inhabitants live without dependence on technology; no advanced education; medical care equivalent to 20th century level (at best).
Industrial Sophistication
A Heavily industrialized. Capable of manufacturing any and all complex products.
B Moderately industrialized. May produce a limited quantity and range of complex products.
C Basic heavy industry. Equivalent to roughly 22nd century technology; fusion technology possible, but no complex products (including BattleMechs).
D Low industrialization. Roughly equivalent to mid-20th century level; fusion technology must be imported.
F No industrialization.
Raw Material Dependence
A Fully self-sufficient. System produces all needed raw materials and may export in large quantities.
B Mostly self-sufficient. System produces all needed raw materials and may export a small surplus.
C Self-sustaining. System produces some of its needed raw materials and imports the rest.
D Dependent. System is poor in raw materials and must import most of its material needs.
F Heavily dependent. System utterly reliant on imported materials to maintain industry and population.
Industrial Output
A High output. World has wide industrial and commercial base capable of exporting most of its excess output, if sufficient space transport is available.
B Good output. World’s industrial and commercial base suffi cient for modest product export.
C Limited output. World has a small industrial base which limits exports; imported goods common.
D Negligible output. World’s industrial base insuffi cient for major exports; reliant on imported goods.
F No output. World must import most—if not all—of its heavy industrial and high-tech needs.
Agricultural Dependence
A Breadbasket. Planetary agro industries meet all local needs and sustain a thriving export trade, as allowed by available space transport.
B Abundant world. Rich agricultural environment sustains local needs and permits limited exports.
C Modest agriculture. Most food locally produced, though some agricultural needs rely on imports.
D Poor agriculture. Minimal agricultural output forces heavy reliance on off -world imports to sustain the local population.
F Barren world. World’s agricultural output cannot sustain the local population without continuous off -world imports.
Tech rating is meant to show a general overview of how sophisticated a piece of equipment is. A battlemech is going to be rated in the D-F tech range whereas a tank is considered a B. Oddly Pre-nineteenth century tech doesn't even register on this rating system.
As for why the USILR system is A (good)-F(bad) and the tech rating is A(low-tech) F(high-tech) my guess is you can increase your tech rating if need be. Say the the timeline is advanced several hundred years through a golden age that ushers in even more advance tech, The USLIR system is the way it is because it's just a measure of how sustainable that measure of industry is compared to from one world to another. Terra is rated pretty high across the board because it hasn't really been touched by war for a very long time and has had time to develop everything it needs. Worlds in the periphery on the other hand may rate more towards the low end because many of them are considered barely habitable.
Something else to remember is that to be able to produce and assemble a battlemech you'll need a world with industrial sophistication rating of A or B otherwise you probably can't build it there.
Confusing as hell (for the one being A good, F bad and the other being A bad, F good)... but very informative.
Nirasaki is a straight C through it all on Megamek in 3049; however this is the default setting on all planets with incomplete information or that lacks fluff specific on these aspects. (This and Nirasaki's history doesn't agree with being a straight 'C'.)
Dieron not far off is B-B-A-B-C but is much more detail rich in the structure because there are units trained and stationed here that occupy other planets.
Yea a LOT of the planets are straight C's in megamek right now. My understanding is there is a project to fluff out that info as much as possible, it's just a lot of work by a few people and takes time.
Leg styles. You have two very different setups there that will depend on how you want the transition from walking to tracked movement. The first one is the more stable and practical design as until it it fully settled onto its tracks the Nin Kei's center of gravity, it just moving down and not affecting its point of contact with the ground. Exiting the stance can be accomplished by having the 'Mech lean forward slightly and moving both the legs and manipulating the bogey wheels (bottom wheels treads run around) so that the parts closer to the foot extend down slightly to provide a smaller "foot" that the Nin Kei can rotate to its actual foot from. Both of these motions would be very fluid. This would be the more graceful of the two configurations. It would also be possible for the 'Mech to move with a skating motion due to the longer legs, allowing a more graceful shift of the center of gravity as the range of motion for the legs would be more forgiving.
The second configuration requires a much more dynamic set of motions for the transition will be much faster and less stable. Due to the transition motion having to rotate around the point of contact with the ground a Nin Kei using the second set of legs will have to fall backwards onto its "calfs" (more correctly, this would be the sole of the foot of a human or bird for that matter as birds technically walk on their toes) requiring the upper portions of the legs to be heavily reinforced to withstand the shock (possibly oversized actuators to lessen the strain on them as well). To exit tracked mode the Nin Kei would literally have to throw itself forward and upwards to rotate to standing. Both of these are extremely jerky and mechanical movements. The latter's only real recommendations over the former is the larger track area for lower ground pressure and better traction as well as a significant lowering of the 'Mechs profile since nearly half the leg suddenly become the foot.
9
Koniving, on 13 December 2014 - 08:51 AM, said:
)
