141 replies to this topic

[bpphantom]

There are custom rules out there somewhere for the "centaur" style mechs. They were so unbalanced it was crazy. Still, fun for a Level 3 anything goes afternoon.

[Thaygood]

The mech god created mechs in his image so two leg not four...LOL LOL

[Breaker]

I used to love quads. Not for any technical reason, they just looked cool. It was an aesthetic thing for me.

[Gallowglas]

Walk on two legs, not on four. Walk on four legs breaks the law. What happens when we break the law? What happens when the rules aren't fair? We all know where we go from there...to the house of pain!

Sorry, obligatory Oingo Boingo moment.

Edited by Gallowglas, 16 July 2012 - 09:03 AM.

[Kraven Kor]

PissdOffChuchNorrisWithChainsaw, on 22 June 2012 - 05:29 AM, said:

Are the four legged mechs really without any torso rotation in the battletech canon? To me it sounds just fine to have torso rotation on both designs. Think it as a tank with turret. Doesn't really matter if you have four legs or two - you can still have a turret and the torso effectively is just a rotating turret.

There also seems to have been three legged mechs as well:
http://www.sarna.net...res_(BattleMech)

Well, turrets are another matter, and are a separate piece of equipment on 'mechs, quad or no. That being said, I can see a quad mech as being a "turret" on 4 legs, but that was not how the tabletop rules had them.

My main problem with quads is way less space to mount stuff. Easy to build a laser-heavy mech on... but hard to do with ballistic weapons. You lose about 12 crit spaces IIRC.

[BlackAlpha]

Adrienne Vorton, on 22 June 2012 - 05:32 AM, said:

i just don´t like them... nah wrong...i REALLY don´t like them... most of the quad designs are not what my sense of "mech" is...

no Mech:

NO MECH:


MECH!!!

dont get me wrong, i like trans formers, in transformers but battletech is battletech

THIS! It's the law of nature, mechs have two legs.

[Thalas]

Reality versus the TT. In reality it's a superior design. In TT they're not as it would've wiped out the bipeds so they balanced it with a bunch of penalties.

[Kraven Kor]

Black Alpha:

You are posting the worst examples of "non-mechs" - there are fracking sweet looking quad mechs.

A "Destroyer" mech (not BT, but cool looking):

\

Another I'm not sure of, Scorpion I think?

Battletech trying to do an AT-AT, the Sirocco (a favorite of my chosen Successor State):



Then there is the "Great Turtle" which doesn't look horrible.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Great_Turtle

Most of the quads were added later and the designs look more like the Voltron lions than Battlemechs; but plenty of quad designs exist that are more utilitarian or militaristic / realistic looking.

[Rychard Starheart]

Dude, I love quads. Things can lose a leg and still keep going. Just wish they had more internals.

Edited by Rychard Starheart, 16 July 2012 - 01:04 PM.

[Knight2pwn]

ZOMG! I always wanted a Scorpian. So let us unite brothers and glory in the creation of the ultimate 'mech. The four legged Urbanmech varient. The Quadurban. AAAAAAAAAAAHHH!.

Uhm, does anyone have a towel?

[Dozer]

As a friend of mine put it; "I would rather walk into the battle as a man than crawl into it like a dog"

He wasn't a big dog lover

Edited by Dozer, 17 July 2012 - 12:36 AM.

[Machalel]

Quads rock...

They are so much more logical and make so much more sense than Bipedal mechs (even if the BT TT rules disagree)

Edited by Machalel, 17 July 2012 - 12:44 AM.

[Force Nova]

3rdworld, on 16 July 2012 - 05:33 AM, said:

Can I play at your quad party?

WHAT the HELL is THAT?! It looks absolutely terrible...

KailKromier, on 16 July 2012 - 08:09 AM, said:

I imagine if they ever added Quads to the game it would look something like a cross between Chromehounds and Mechassault.

just imagine...Chromehound Quad chassis with an Atlas upper torso on a 360 degree torso twist.....*shudders*

Since in Chromehounds the quad were the most heavily armored, a quad atlas would be a pain in the bum to take out, with 360 turn and all.

Machalel, on 17 July 2012 - 12:44 AM, said:

Quads rock...

They are so much more logical and make so much more sense than Bipedal mechs (even if the BT TT rules disagree)

^^ That. I fully agree.

In reality, who would want to make bipedal mechs with inferior stability in stead of quadrupedal mechs with their superior stability and probably better carry capacity? And it's not as if it was impossible to make them have a turning torso either.

[Machalel]

Force Nova, on 17 July 2012 - 01:43 AM, said:

WHAT the HELL is THAT?! It looks absolutely terrible...

A Mandrill...

Makes you wonder what it looks like from the rear!








There's a Quad for everyone, even the BroPony fans!

Edited by Machalel, 17 July 2012 - 02:22 AM.

[Rogen]

Yeah i love quad mechs. In TT i even created entire company build from quadm mchs. (4 tarantulas was recon lance.)

And most peaple here do not realize thet biggest quad advantage was under level 3 rules of cover, where you rolled on standart table (instead of reduced one for cover), but discarded any hits to legs. So quad mech had much highier chance do discard hits to it, and can was able to enter hull down position due to this.

[Twisp]

Machalel, on 17 July 2012 - 02:16 AM, said:

A Mandrill...

Makes you wonder what it looks like from the rear!








There's a Quad for everyone, even the BroPony fans!

I think that thing singlehandedly dismantled any argument I could make for a quad mechs existence.

Still....SCORPION

[MuffinTop]

Twisp, on 16 July 2012 - 04:19 AM, said:

SCOOOORRRRPPPIOOON

How can you even hate/dislike this? Its so cute, I just want to hug it !

[Thorgar Wulfson]

more variety the better to me.

[Gremlich Johns]

If the quads walked the way they were portrayed in Anime, nobody would like them. Just use a tank instead. No legs to worry about and packs the same if not more firepower.

[Arctic Fox]

Kraven Kor, on 16 July 2012 - 12:13 PM, said:

Another I'm not sure of, Scorpion I think?

That's a Boggart Quad ProtoMech.