20517 replies to this topic

[Virlutris]

MeiSooHaityu, on 16 May 2016 - 12:03 PM, said:

You could use a Firestarter I suppose, but I think the biggest point of the Hollander is it has a very high mount ballistic for sniping. A Firestarter's ballistic mounts aren't up in the shoulder if I remember.

The Firestarter probably looks the part a bit more, but I think the Raven with the Gauss firing position accomplishes the task closer to how the Hollander does.

I gotcha.

It comes down to what you're approximating. I think if we're going for ultimate 35 ton Gauss peekaboo mech, the Raven's pretty strong. If we're going to appoximate how it looks as a humanoid (like the Hollander), it's Firestarter.

As to which I'd prefer for running the huild generally? I haven't done it on either, but the Raven seems like the better tactical fit because of the tiny arm hitbox, plus the fact that torso-mounts make XLs even riskier. The build already needs an XL to exceed Urbie speeds. Putting a Gauss in a humanoid ST packing an XL is spoiling for trouble.

Then again, I think an ECM-toting Gauss-cada 3M is funny, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. "Funny" or "funsies" and "best fit" don't always line up consistently.

[Metus regem]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 May 2016 - 11:53 AM, said:

wuts a Katura?

The yahoos that think a Katana on a mech would be a good idea.... better known as House Kurita....or the Draconis Combine

[Bishop Steiner]

Metus regem, on 16 May 2016 - 02:28 PM, said:

The yahoos that think a Katana on a mech would be a good idea.... better known as House Kurita....or the Draconis Combine

[CK16]

Metus regem, on 16 May 2016 - 02:28 PM, said:

The yahoos that think a Katana on a mech would be a good idea.... better known as House Kurita....or the Draconis Combine

Or you know an Axe?.....If you want to Melee I would gladly draw a circle of equals and we dis mount other wise no melee.

[Metus regem]

CK16, on 16 May 2016 - 03:52 PM, said:

Or you know an Axe?.....If you want to Melee I would gladly draw a circle of equals and we dis mount other wise no melee.

An Ax actually makes sense, not as much as a mace or club, but it is still a weapon.more about crushing than slicing.... Katanas are wonderful at slicing soft materials such as leather, silk and flesh but against metal armour, no so good. A European Long Sword, Bas*add or two handed would be more effective as they were little more than sharpened clubs, with an edge about as sharp as a butter knife.

[Bishop Steiner]

CK16, on 16 May 2016 - 03:52 PM, said:

Or you know an Axe?.....If you want to Melee I would gladly draw a circle of equals and we dis mount other wise no melee.

Robots with big fists don't make sense....unless you let me punch you with it if you get in my face.

[CK16]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 May 2016 - 04:18 PM, said:

Robots with big fists don't make sense....unless you let me punch you with it if you get in my face.

Well you never know when you might want to pick stuff up!

[Odanan]

CK16, on 16 May 2016 - 04:38 PM, said:

Well you never know when you might want to pick stuff up!

Like tress or mechs' limbs to use as clubs.

[Bishop Steiner]

CK16, on 16 May 2016 - 04:38 PM, said:

Well you never know when you might want to pick stuff up!

Odanan, on 16 May 2016 - 04:47 PM, said:

Like tress or mechs' limbs to use as clubs.

or the head off your enemy's mech.....

[Metus regem]

Odanan, on 16 May 2016 - 04:47 PM, said:

Like tress or mechs' limbs to use as clubs.

Or in some cases a whole Mech....

I've had an Atlas use a Locust as a club before, thanks to the 20% carrying capacity rule.... Sure was funny to see the look on that guy's face when I took his Locust, then used it to kill his Phoenix Hawk a few turns later.....

[ShadowbaneX]

Juodas Varnas, on 16 May 2016 - 11:31 AM, said:

Anyone really surprised?

Most IS assaults can't run XL engines unless the pilot has a really strong deathwish.

Or someone likes to missile boat assaults. Not saying it's a better idea, but it's there.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Not the same.

Hollander or Hollander II FTW!

Besides, I want a mech, not a football player lol.

[CDLord HHGD]

I remember reading in William H. Keith, Jr.'s novel (Operation Excalibur, the first BTech novel I ever read) the areas meant for mech housing and movements had control panels operable and manipulatable by mechs (why there is no control tower, I have no idea, story). There was also a part in another novel where Morgan Kell was helping to build a village and carrying around i-beams....

So articulated hands have their uses outside of punching. What came first though? Mech hands or mech controls?

[wanderer]

Quote

An Ax actually makes sense, not as much as a mace or club, but it is still a weapon.more about crushing than slicing.... Katanas are wonderful at slicing soft materials such as leather, silk and flesh but against metal armour, no so good. A European Long Sword, Bas*add or two handed would be more effective as they were little more than sharpened clubs, with an edge about as sharp as a butter knife.

Honestly, even a katana-shaped 'Mech sword is far too broad to be a truly "edged" weapon, but is indeed built along those lines. It's better balanced but not quite as good at crushing through armor as a hatchet, thus the better to-hit but lower damage in tabletop. The only really "edged" melee weapon in TT for a 'Mech are vibroblades, claws, and retractible blades (the last of which is also more piercing).

Quote

What came first though? Mech hands or mech controls?

Battlemechs were built off of industrial designs, many of which indeed have hands- but the first Battlemech actually had no hand actuators (the Mackie)...so in that regard, hands came second!

Edited by wanderer, 17 May 2016 - 01:17 PM.

[Steinar Bergstol]

Metus regem, on 16 May 2016 - 04:12 PM, said:

An Ax actually makes sense, not as much as a mace or club, but it is still a weapon.more about crushing than slicing.... Katanas are wonderful at slicing soft materials such as leather, silk and flesh but against metal armour, no so good. A European Long Sword, Bas*add or two handed would be more effective as they were little more than sharpened clubs, with an edge about as sharp as a butter knife.

Not actually true as such regarding European swords. They were in fact quite sharp despite the myths about them not being so. A sword is, after all, a cutting implement. A sharp edge is what you want. Now, granted a zweihander or something along those lines might not have been honed to a razor edge, but by and large European swords were no less sharp than swords of other regions.

Still, against armor you want something other than a sword. Something which focuses a powerful impact on a very small area, which is what warhammers (particularly if they have a spike on the back), axes and the like do very well compared to a sword.

[zagibu]

Most footmen weren't well armored. They had a pot helmet, sometimes a shield, and if they were really lucky, some mail armor to cover their torso and upper arms. Often though, they only had padded armor or no body armor at all. That's why swords were still used in the melee, when it was closer than pike or halberd range, to cut down the most numerous opponent on the battlefield.

[L3mming2]

Steinar Bergstol, on 19 May 2016 - 12:53 AM, said:

Not actually true as such regarding European swords. They were in fact quite sharp despite the myths about them not being so. A sword is, after all, a cutting implement. A sharp edge is what you want. Now, granted a zweihander or something along those lines might not have been honed to a razor edge, but by and large European swords were no less sharp than swords of other regions.

Still, against armor you want something other than a sword. Something which focuses a powerful impact on a very small area, which is what warhammers (particularly if they have a spike on the back), axes and the like do very well compared to a sword.

against armor a fine long pointy sword turned out to be best, hence the sabers.. when armor got better they where the counter and where used to stab the weak spots.. (nek, joints, eyes... ) a stab is faster then swinging a big hammer around..

[Odanan]

L3mming2, on 19 May 2016 - 01:44 AM, said:

against armor a fine long pointy sword turned out to be best, hence the sabers.. when armor got better they where the counter and where used to stab the weak spots.. (nek, joints, eyes... ) a stab is faster then swinging a big hammer around..

I believe sabers/rapiers came not to counter armor, but to fight against unarmored soldiers.

With the advent of guns (very effective against armor), the heavy armor was slowly abandoned. Consequently, you didn't need heavy melee weapons to kill someone.

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 19 May 2016 - 05:03 AM, said:

I believe sabers/rapiers came not to counter armor, but to fight against unarmored soldiers.

With the advent of guns (very effective against armor), the heavy armor was slowly abandoned. Consequently, you didn't need heavy melee weapons to kill someone.

you would be correct. By the days of Saber and Rapier, usually only a breastplate, at most was worn, because firearms had negated the advantages of heavy armor. In actual combat, even an expert is hard pressed to land rapier hits in the limited gaps of gothic plate armor, especially on a moving opponent intent on killing you back.

The sword, as a general rule, was actually quite poor at defeating heavy armor as it did not have the mass (in most cases) to cleave or the strength to punch through. This why in the heyday of heavy armor, Nobles generally fought with swords because they were ideal against unarmored peasants, and better for subduing than actually killing an armored noble opponent... who could then be ransomed back to his family, as was the normal practice.

Hence why the most common weapons used to kill armored opponents were Military Picks and Hammers, Polearms like the Glaive or Halberd (also good for dismounting the heavily armored sir from his horse), Spears (which could be set to receive a charge, letting the Knights momentum due what the human arm could not, in terms of momentum), Axes and Maces. Oh, and the Longbow, which could punch through the heaviest armor, though it had a decent chance of deflecting if you didn't hit it dead on.

Musket fire, on the other hand almost never seemed to deflect (probably due to the soft, dense lead deforming, and thus not glancing like a hardened steel bodkin), and had a bad habit of poking hole s in expensive armor.

Hence it's decline outside of largely ceremonial use, and the rise of Epee, Rapier, Saber, etc.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 19 May 2016 - 06:15 AM.

[Steinar Bergstol]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 May 2016 - 05:37 AM, said:

(Lots of good stuff about the evolution of arms vs armor etc.)

Pretty much this, yes. The Rapier, for example, was apparently primarily a civilian weapon than a military weapon during its heyday, used by unarmored or lighhtly armored civvies rather than as a battlefield weapon (where polearm formations and the like would be more likely what you would face).

That said, swords are cool. Movies and stories have conditioned us to think swords are awesome since an early age, which is why we all think they're awesome even if they weren't the all purpose superior in every way to every other weapon Hollywood and the like would often like us to believe. They're cool. They look cool. Our inner nerd kid goes "AWESOME!" when we see a nifty looking swordfight on the screen. This is pretty much why I own a parrying dagger, a shortsword, a rapier and a hand-and-a-half sword (oh, and a traditional longbow) myself, because my inner nerd kid went "COOOOOOL!" when I saw them and my older, more sensible real-age-nerd self went "Yeah, pretty cool, and I'm old enough that I can afford them now if I want to. I'm buying it!"

That said, _this_ beautiful sidesword is a piece I'd really like to get my hands on and hang on my wall next to my rapier and parrying dagger!