Jump to content

What moves at 86 kph, Can jump 60 meters and carries a Long Tom Artillery Cannon?


109 replies to this topic

#101 Skylarr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,646 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationThe Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:13 AM

View PostBishop Steiner, on 30 July 2012 - 12:06 AM, said:

"If the attack hits, it is treated as a hit from a direct-fire ballistic weapon, resolved against the unit’s facing relative to the attacking unit. An additional 5 points of artillery damage applies to all other units in the target’s hex (treat as an area-effect weapon if these other units include infantry)."

refresh my memory... how is damage applied from a direct fire ballistic weapon? (Hint... ac/20s and Gauss Rifles are "direct fire ballistic weapons". Also note specific wording "direct fire BALLISTIC" vs "Direct Fire ARTILLERY) Do they distribute their damage in 5 pt clusters?


This is only for attacks from hidden units that are point blank to the arty piece.

Edited by Skylarr, 30 July 2012 - 12:18 AM.


#102 Lyran Scout

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Staff Sergeant Major
  • 45 posts
  • Locationthat house down the road on that street in this town in the middle of this place

Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:27 AM

this just reminds me of the hollander from mech commander 2 that little 35 ton mech the 1 gauss rifle

Edited by PURE EPICNESS, 30 July 2012 - 12:27 AM.


#103 The Basilisk

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 3,270 posts
  • LocationFrankfurt a.M.

Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:28 AM

A very nice idea....yea and thats about it.
This concept hurts the construction rules of the tabletop, not to say that a cannon like this would be more appropriate on a four legged design.
The maximum for critspreading is arm to torso or torso side to center according to rulebook 1993 revised version.
There fore a LT-cannon can't be equipt on Mechs.
The critspread for Long Tom is aimed at TANK construktion rules which means the whole tank is a driving cannon with 6 crits free. 24 crits for the cannon and 6 crits per zone. Tank has 5 zones. Front right left rear tower.
But still nice painting job and intresting concept.

Edited by The Basilisk, 30 July 2012 - 12:38 AM.


#104 Skylarr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,646 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationThe Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:36 AM

Tactical Operations page 213 says:

Rearming Under Fire

  • If a player is attempting to load a ’Mech and no other ’Mech is available to do the loading (or no unit with a lift hoist; see p. 136, TW), then it takes five turns to load 1 ton of ammunition. For a ’Mech to be available for this rearming, it must have one of the following: a working hand actuator on an arm where all actuators are active (meaning no actuator in the arm has taken a critical hit), a working lift hoist or a working salvage arm.

So the Hunchback can reload the Arty Mech, But,
  • For each 1 ton of ammunition successfully loaded, the controlling player immediately rolls 2D6. On a result of 11 or 12, the ammunition explodes, just as if it was hit by an attack (see below); this represents the extreme haste with which the ammo is being loaded.


#105 Skylarr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,646 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationThe Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Posted 30 July 2012 - 12:39 AM

Bishop I like the concept and I would pilot one. I just had some question.

#106 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 30 July 2012 - 09:40 AM

View PostSkylarr, on 30 July 2012 - 12:39 AM, said:

Bishop I like the concept and I would pilot one. I just had some question.



Personally, I'm just kinda tired of the subject. Most of the things brought up, have been answered somewherre in that 5 or so pages of posts preceeeding, and a lot of the stuff just doesn't really matter, since thhis isn't a design that will be in MWO or the like, and I acknowledge is not tourney legal (anymore).

Fact is getting the 3rd degree over fluff points is just kinda old. Plus, most of those points are gray zones, left open to some interpretation. The Point-Blank rule, for instance vs the "Direct" fire model, never really took into account that an artillery unit might actually have a standard targeting system (not the advanced Clan one that IS specifically prohibited) and might get used up close as a BFG (a desperation move for sure), but one that the rules never made much sense on. End of the day, a gun is a gun, and the same laws of phsyics apply no matter how big or small.

The design itself WAS at one point vetted by FASA staff for legal use in Tournament play, though only do to some very broken rules in that edition of the rules of War. All following material prohibited it, and if they had done better editing, it probably would not have been legal even then. Kiind of a shame, TBH, because the later LT Cannon is total crap. It does nothing the Clans ATMS doesn't do a lot better.

One thing to note on the "mech hand reloading" system.... because the "clip" style magaizines in Mechs .likte the Enfocer were "fluff" they don't take into account the concept, it is essentially a rule for loading single loose rounds into a mechs internal magazine, where a little too much applied pressure, or a bad angle is well.... not good. "Clips" would fall under a special case rule, like Riflemans reversible arms and other minutiae, But obviously were nto one anyone really thought of, since a pre-loaded, rigid detachable magazine, like the one in a Hatchetman or Enforcer, would not have the same isssues, and obviously would be much faster to reload than having to manually insert 10 or more individual rounds. (HONESTLY, THE lEVEL 3 RULES SHOULD MAKE A case VARIANT THAT IS A DETACHABLE MAGAINE... ADD SOME WEIGHT AND A CRIT, BUT ALLOW FOR MUCH FASTER RE-ARMING. bUT THEY DON'T, HENCE, IT'S TECHNICALLY JUST fLUFF) AND I really hate the location of the caps lock on this effin keyboard.

As for the Drop a medium or light with a single shot.. 20-25 pts in one locale would do just that in most cases, cand anytime a mech endures more than 20 pts, a piloting roll is needed (hence the literary license taken with knocking over an Atlas), though common sense does dictate that if a round does say, 25 pts of splach damage to anything inits 30 meter blast bubble, the same round directly hitting a unit, especially in direct fire, would do substantially more, since the buulk of the blast is actually ON the target, vs near the target, and one even has to account for the kinetic damage of being hit by a rather large shell itself. Again, just fluff (and a dose of common sense home rule) but pretty much any mech that took a direct hit from one of those shells would probably be toast. The actual "felt damage" wouuld realistically be douubled at least, and even all adjecent locations would suffer splash damage from the explosion. Not a canon rule, just fluff. Tis why I am sick of having to go over it.

#107 Exilyth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 2,100 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 30 July 2012 - 01:58 PM

While not rules legal, the design from OP looks nice. Maybe he could mount a thumper/sniper instead?
The Arrow IV, while a little shorter on range, is a good replacement for the Long Tom in terms of damage.
Then again, a redesign with misles might not look as good.


Generally, the problem with designing artillery units is that it's hard to do a unit that's really more usefull than the Arrow IV Catapult or the existing artillery vehicles.
Either, you end up with less firepower, or something slow and vulnerable.

Also, I wonder why hover vehicles aren't required to mount additional stabilizers when mounting artillery... I would imagine the recoil sends them flying backwards quite a bit.

#108 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 30 July 2012 - 10:40 PM

good point with the hovercraft..... but lets not get crazy and expect common sense or consistency now!

#109 Z0MBIE Y0SHI

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,152 posts
  • LocationStrana Mechty

Posted 31 July 2012 - 09:22 AM

An artillery mech capable of quickly moving out of harms way and staying out of the fray.

An awesome fan design, I salute you.

#110 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 31 July 2012 - 06:22 PM

View PostZ0MBIE Y0SHI, on 31 July 2012 - 09:22 AM, said:

An artillery mech capable of quickly moving out of harms way and staying out of the fray.

An awesome fan design, I salute you.

Thank you. A re-animated Japanese Lizard thing with a grasp of the concept...... an awesome thing also! *returns salute*





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users