57 replies to this topic

[Cybercrime]

Without arms/torso or when ammo depleted mech should run faster because of weight losing.
With this feature gameplay becomes more realistic.

Edited by ODONATA, 01 September 2014 - 09:54 AM.

[Sephlock]

I agree, damaged mechs should be able to run faster.

[Bishop Steiner]

if they were using a traditional drivetrain/wheeled or thrust sort of propulsion, that would be true.

But people who lose arms don't run faster. They actually run slower, as the arms no longer are there to act as counterbalances.
Mechs use artificial myomer musculature, and a actuator laden "skeleton" to largely mimic humanoid movement, and thus they don't suddenly increase their speed due to "weight loss".

[Elizander]

Bishop Steiner, on 01 September 2014 - 09:58 AM, said:

if they were using a traditional drivetrain/wheeled or thrust sort of propulsion, that would be true.

But people who lose arms don't run faster. They actually run slower, as the arms no longer are there to act as counterbalances.
Mechs use artificial myomer musculature, and a actuator laden "skeleton" to largely mimic humanoid movement, and thus they don't suddenly increase their speed due to "weight loss".

What he said.

[Willard Phule]

Actually, and I hate to throw TableTop rules into this, you're correct.

Speed is supposed to be based on weight and the size of the engine. In theory, you can put together an underweight mech and it should move faster.

That being said...remember who we're talking about here. They can't even get MASC to work because going over 150kph breaks the coding.

Not going to happen.

[SgtMagor]

what would be kewl is if mechs with hand actuators could use hand held weapons and if the weapon is destroyed, or dropped. the loss in tonnage would allow the mech to go faster.

[Carrie Harder]

The only way to make your robot go faster is to paint it red.

[Roland]

Only mechs carrying giant knives should run faster.

[wolf74]

A really used rule in CBT is on low G Planets Mech Could run faster but risk damaging the Leg actuators.

[101011]

Willard Phule, on 01 September 2014 - 10:05 AM, said:

Actually, and I hate to throw TableTop rules into this, you're correct.

Speed is supposed to be based on weight and the size of the engine. In theory, you can put together an underweight mech and it should move faster.

That being said...remember who we're talking about here. They can't even get MASC to work because going over 150kph breaks the coding.

Not going to happen.

Oh, I believe they could do it. They just want to prevent things like the 128 kph Atlas or the 106 kph Dire Wolf, as hilarious as those would be.

[Viges]

Hahaha lol they can run faster or slower because they have nothing to do with real world. They will run as fast as you tell them, there are no other reasons.

[Y E O N N E]

Bishop Steiner, on 01 September 2014 - 09:58 AM, said:

if they were using a traditional drivetrain/wheeled or thrust sort of propulsion, that would be true.

But people who lose arms don't run faster. They actually run slower, as the arms no longer are there to act as counterbalances.
Mechs use artificial myomer musculature, and a actuator laden "skeleton" to largely mimic humanoid movement, and thus they don't suddenly increase their speed due to "weight loss".

But they do get faster with less mass. Why else would a 20 ton Locust run faster than a 100 ton Atlas with the same engine?

[CN9 ACE PILOT]

Viges, on 01 September 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

Hahaha lol they can run faster or slower because they have nothing to do with real world. They will run as fast as you tell them, there are no other reasons.

Except for wherein the contract they leased for battletech it has a explicit set of rules of how far they can stray from the cannon.

[Scratx]

wolf74, on 01 September 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

A really used rule in CBT is on low G Planets Mech Could run faster but risk damaging the Leg actuators.

... That's a really stupid rule. Your capability to accelerate is based on how much traction you can get (on top of the obvious 'more strength/power for the mass'), and higher gravity increases potential traction, not the other way around.

Remember, mass and weight are not the same! Remember your physics class, folks, Newton's Second Law of Motion. Force vector equals mass times acceleration vector. F = ma . And since this is only half the story, check Static Friction! In order for your feet to get you moving, you need to exert force on the surface below you, and if you apply more force than the static friction allows, your feet start slipping. Aaaand... this limit is based on both the static friction coefficient and the Normal Force which... is typically mainly your weight...


TL;DR : Rule seems wrong when looked at from a physics perspective. That's BT for you.

[Bishop Steiner]

Yeonne Greene, on 01 September 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

But they do get faster with less mass. Why else would a 20 ton Locust run faster than a 100 ton Atlas with the same engine?

because it's actuator were designed for that speed. You are mimicking a humanoid construction, it's not JUST the engine that is different in each mech. An actuator designed to go 60 kph in a 20 ton mech would burn up trying to go 120 kph, IF it could move that fast to begin with. Add in geometry design (there is a reason that a Puma weighing the same as a Cheetah, can't run as fast as a cheetah), and such and you got a huge mess.

Yes brtech rules oversimplify things, but it really doesn't logically work.

But in game terms, it's most simply there to keep someone from building a 70 ton mech, and equipping 35 tons worth of gear to make it go as fast as a Jenner, but able to carry twice as much armor.

because we had 100 kph Awesomes in early CB..... it was kinda fun...for about 2 minutes. and totally gamebreaking.
If you don't see the problem with mechs gaining speed off of losing weight with this


Mind you..as a heavy mech, not so good. On the other hand, as a mech with the speed of a Cicada (which is what the OP is suggesting, since it's now a 35 ton mech with a 280 rated engine) and the equivalent of 14 tons of armor?

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Willard Phule, on 01 September 2014 - 10:05 AM, said:

That being said...remember who we're talking about here. They can't even get MASC to work because going over 150kph breaks the coding.

I run at 171kph and it doesn't break a damn thing but my own legs from every tiny pebble and bump in the road. The rage from energy boats who can't touch me makes it worth while tho.

[CN9 ACE PILOT]

wolf74, on 01 September 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

A really used rule in CBT is on low G Planets Mech Could run faster but risk damaging the Leg actuators.

Scratx, on 01 September 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

... That's a really stupid rule. Your capability to accelerate is based on how much traction you can get (on top of the obvious 'more strength/power for the mass'), and higher gravity increases potential traction, not the other way around.

I will now write down the passage from my copy of the jade phoenix legacy explaining this matter, page 271. Bloodname.

"...She had warned Aidan about moving too fast in the moon's low gravity.
On Rhea(lowGmoon) a BattleMech could travel sixty times faster than in normal gravity, but such low gravity affected the structural integrity of the running 'Mech. Anything could happen, from the freezing of myomer muscle clumps to fractures on any surface area.
What Marthe feared finally happened. As the Summoner ran along, it's left leg came down hard on the moon's surface. The leg, built to support a seventy ton 'Mech running at eighty-six kilometers per hour, was a mechanical marvel of supports and shock absorbers. But Aidan was testing its limits and supperabsorbers. It was no surprise when the 'Mech's leg snapped off at the knee."

You have to keep in mind, they, like others have mentioned, are built to mimic human movement. A human will only be able to run so fast, as long as the friction in the kneecap or the force applied to it is able to hold, not just the knee but all the body together.

People without one or two arm don't run faster, their center of balance will be greatly thrown off, we as humans were not designed to be able to "run" faster with missing limbs.

[Scratx]

CN9 ACE PILOT, on 01 September 2014 - 11:12 AM, said:

I will now write down the passage from my copy of the jade phoenix legacy explaining this matter, page 271. Bloodname.

"...She had warned Aidan about moving too fast in the moon's low gravity.
On Rhea(lowGmoon) a BattleMech could travel sixty times faster than in normal gravity, but such low gravity affected the structural integrity of the running 'Mech. Anything could happen, from the freezing of myomer muscle clumps to fractures on any surface area.
What Marthe feared finally happened. As the Summoner ran along, it's left leg came down hard on the moon's surface. The leg, built to support a seventy ton 'Mech running at eighty-six kilometers per hour, was a mechanical marvel of supports and shock absorbers. But Aidan was testing its limits and supperabsorbers. It was no surprise when the 'Mech's leg snapped off at the knee."

You have to keep in mind, they, like others have mentioned, are built to mimic human movement. A human will only be able to run so fast, as long as the friction in the kneecap or the force applied to it is able to hold, not just the knee but all the body together.

People without one or two arm don't run faster, their center of balance will be greatly thrown off, we as humans were not designed to be able to "run" faster with missing limbs.

Um, I wasn't disagreeing. I was pointing out that low gravity should actually hinder movement because it's harder to get traction, especially if the surface you're trying to run on is a hard surface.

[Y E O N N E]

Bishop Steiner, on 01 September 2014 - 10:59 AM, said:

because it's actuator were designed for that speed. You are mimicking a humanoid construction, it's not JUST the engine that is different in each mech. An actuator designed to go 60 kph in a 20 ton mech would burn up trying to go 120 kph, IF it could move that fast to begin with. Add in geometry design (there is a reason that a Puma weighing the same as a Cheetah, can't run as fast as a cheetah), and such and you got a huge mess.

Yes brtech rules oversimplify things, but it really doesn't logically work.

But in game terms, it's most simply there to keep someone from building a 70 ton mech, and equipping 35 tons worth of gear to make it go as fast as a Jenner, but able to carry twice as much armor.

because we had 100 kph Awesomes in early CB..... it was kinda fun...for about 2 minutes. and totally gamebreaking.
If you don't see the problem with mechs gaining speed off of losing weight with this


Mind you..as a heavy mech, not so good. On the other hand, as a mech with the speed of a Cicada (which is what the OP is suggesting, since it's now a 35 ton mech with a 280 rated engine) and the equivalent of 14 tons of armor?

That...doesn't make sense. Mechanically, that doesn't make any sense. The stress on a mechanical component is the result of forces applied to it. In mechanical terms, that's the energy from speed and mass. If you reduce mass, then you can increase speed.

Ergo, actuators on a 100 ton 'Mech designed to go 60 kph on a 100 ton 'Mech should be able to go faster with no adverse effects if used on a lighter 'Mech.

The only remotely sensible way to explain it is that the legs are still the same mass even if you removed weapons from the torso and arms, ergo they require the same energy to move as they always have and thus can't go any faster.

I'm not really saying the 'Mechs in the game should move faster with less weight or missing limbs, just that the mechanics of BattleTech are, at every turn, so terribly inaccurate, unrealistic, and generally mangled that the lore is hard to take seriously at all. The whole thing is just goofy; they couldn't even come up with a good reason why BattleMechs are a thing when tanks can mount the same weapons for less cost and complexity.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 01 September 2014 - 11:17 AM.

[CN9 ACE PILOT]

Scratx, on 01 September 2014 - 11:16 AM, said:

Um, I wasn't disagreeing. I was pointing out that low gravity should actually hinder movement because it's harder to get traction, especially if the surface you're trying to run on is a hard surface.

Ah, i mistook your statement then.

It was more or less explained a bit further back 'mechs would take long strides or "hop" than actually ruining as they would gain momentum in low gravity. But doing so could destroy their myomer/actuators.