950 replies to this topic

[Moodysea]

No one uses Snowspeeders and Tow Cables...

[Regal]

Random battletech fact #3308922.91-C Every joke topic on the forums inevitably turns into SERIOUS DISCUSSION! *echo echo echo*

[Raledon]

Vitzkrieg, on 22 August 2012 - 06:13 PM, said:

Mach 4 seems fast, but compared to a laser it's still peanuts. Even Mach 1000 is only one thousandth of the speed of light. That means it'd take the projectile 15 minutes to reach the target that's one light second away. That leaves a lot of opportunity to shoot it down, particularly if it can't do evasive maneuvers along the plane perpendicular to the target (ie zig-zag with thrusters pointing sideways).

The super conductor comment just confuses me. As far as I'm aware they're not useful as heat dissipation systems in any way. You generate heat to keep them cool, such as by creating liquid nitrogen and submerging them in it, which allows the super conductor to carry currents far in excess of what it normally could (since it'll have essentially zero resistance). They don't naturally keep cold though.

And as far as stabilization goes, I agree that the navy would clearly use the very best they had available to them. I just have no idea what that tolerance could reasonably be, both in reality and in the BT universe. If it's into micro degrees (that's a millionth of a degree), then fights out to a few light seconds might be possible. That'd give you a 5 meter spread at 1 light second, if you want numbers.

Regarding speed- that is correct, I forgot to do that math, though mine will be defect in any regard since when it'll come to space armament for long range, both tech will be improved, and the people who works on it will have a lot more knowledge. Thanks for the correction, though.

The super-conductors vs overheating (badly explained earlier) were for the many electricity transfers inside the ship (they also transfer heat very well, though it's irrelevant), and mostly Rail Guns or Gauss Rifles I assume will be used. Depending on how well we can solve the side effects of giant magnetic fields inside the ship, we could shoot rail-gun shots far at high speeds, at low cost.

Regarding spread: a US carrier is 333X77X41, and I doubt the "dangerous" fleets will use much smaller ships. With your numbers, I'd say that it's good enough in order to hit with nearly every shot a "standing" target, though the effective range will be decided by the the shot speed and the ship acceleration, more than anything. A system of blind shooting might also be introduced against fleets, since shooting a large enough area with enough weaponry will insure scoring a hit.

Regal, on 23 August 2012 - 12:01 AM, said:

Random battletech fact #3308922.91-C Every joke topic on the forums inevitably turns into SERIOUS DISCUSSION! *echo echo echo*

I'd say this is a very good thing. Or you can wait till the game is released.

[Natasha Kerensky]

SakuranoSenshi, on 22 August 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

Umm, no. LOL

They can reach entirely different star systems, in very short periods of time (hours?) using magic handwaving and some pseudoscience that quotes a tiny energy consumption. Even at 99.99999% light speed, we'd be years to the nearest star to Sol (over 4 years, Proxima Centauri).

It's called bending space.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Natasha Kerensky, on 23 August 2012 - 06:02 AM, said:

It's called bending space.

Nah, it's called 'science fiction with massive handwaving' and you still miss the point, I was replying to someone who attempted to imply this was no big deal at all, indeed we could practically do it today because space has no friction, you know? Which is nonsense.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Solis Obscuri, on 22 August 2012 - 06:14 PM, said:

When damage spreads from a damaged section of a 'mech to an undanged section, it hits the armor first. These things have interlocking bulkheads?

Because it doesn't really spread at all, it's just a mechanic for simulating the fact that you obviously hit something (you got a hit on the dice) but cannot have hit an arm that no longer exists, so you must have also hit the side torso (or centre torso when dealing with sides, etc).

[Natasha Kerensky]

Dimael, on 04 August 2012 - 01:22 AM, said:

To make this clear. Temperature is nothing more than the energy of moving molecules and atoms. No Atoms, no temperature. That simple.

??? Then why do space probes need to keep warm in space? Or people...

[SakuranoSenshi]

Natasha Kerensky, on 23 August 2012 - 06:15 AM, said:

??? Then why do space probes need to keep warm in space? Or people...

People largely have the reverse problem, depending on what their life-support setup is. You can quite quickly cook in something designed to keep you breathing but which generates heat (as doing any work does) and cannot lose it fast enough (hard to do in vacuum). Space probes will be out in deep space (assuming this is what you mean) and must be well insulated - note that this works both ways, it's intended to prevent it from cooking due to exposure to radiation when it is in a 'bright' situation and also meant to keep any heat loss from inside down so that it doesn't freeze too quickly (eventually it near enough will but probably long after we no longer care).

[Melcyna]

Wait let me get this right... In another word, he was confused as to why temperature is still valid in space on the satellite/person where there is no molecule or atom (assuming perfect vacuum, which is not entirely true) surrounding it in this question?

Quote

??? Then why do space probes need to keep warm in space? Or people...

In the simplest term:
Because space itself may not contain energy of any sort (assuming a vacuum) but it still can let energy pass through it in the form of radiation.

If something is radiating enough energy that is caught by the satellite/person and it gives more energy than the satellite/person radiates out into the space then it/he/she will have a net increase of energy, and thus temperature... if the satellite/person is radiating more energy than it is receiving from external sources then it will lose energy/temperature.

[nad2357]

Bloodweaver, on 04 August 2012 - 12:50 AM, said:

It is incorrect -well, misinformed- to say that a vacuum conducts heat worse than air does. Fact is, it doesn't conduct at all. Vacuum = nothing. Heat can't be conducted if there's nothing there to conduct it. There would also not really be a temperature "difference" between the heat sinks' surface and the vacuum, because the vacuum doesn't have a temperature - no molecules means no heat. This is why thermos bottles work; a vacuum makes for an excellent insulator.

The only way to transfer heat through a vacuum is via radiation, which takes a very, very, very, VERY long time. Heat sinks would not function in a vacuum to any discernible degree -period- unless they were the laser type developed by Jade Falcon, since they release their "heat" via light.

In the most basic sense heat is just a form of radiation. All heat is transmitted via radiation because it is radiation. Although it would take an extended period of time to disperse in a vacuum because convection would not apply mechs also have coolant which they could flush and replace with new coolant normally stored in reserve (in case of a slow leak in the coolant system sustained during a terrestrial battle on a planet or moon with an atmosphere at an atmospheric pressure similar to the pressure of the coolant) to bring about a drastic short term temperature drop. Most mechs would only be able to do this once and the coolant system would be evacuated anyway in the event of a breach sustained during battle into space. Another possibility is that mechs could use pressure change similar to the way a refrigerator works with a pump or compressor and a radiator as well as a dual coolant cycle to activly refrigerate coolant. I dont know if this would be cannon as my battle tech knowledge is relatively small but this would work with real world physics

Edited by nad2357, 23 August 2012 - 01:59 PM.

[Nebfer]

Elessar, on 22 August 2012 - 02:11 PM, said:

So I can say that every 100 ton tank, regardless of armor, is, according to BT tabletop rules, weaker (meaning more vulnerable) than a mech.
And that are only the chances for frontal attacks. If the tank is attacked by the side, the probability for impeded movement is even higher.

Well it's generally known that tanks are inferior to battlemechs in the B-tech universe, so the worse critical hit tables is no real surprise. Even so a good number of Assault class tanks can still give a battlemech a bad day.

I believe the crit tables for tanks can in part be said to be due to the inferior agility and mobility of the tank compared to the mech (it's a bit harder to side step in a tank than a biped walker), as such the rounds hitting a tank hit a bit harder...

Solis Obscuri, on 22 August 2012 - 06:14 PM, said:

Yet you still get 8 shots per ton.

Well each round is 125kg which is 1/8th of a ton, I never realy heard about Gauss slugs being the size of cars though... Melons though...

Quote

And on the two occasions during the first couple of Succession Wars when they realize the vendor is screwing them, they let them shut down all communications and capitulate, instead of just summarily executing all the cultist over a 3-day weekend and fixing the system with the aid of their remaining scientists by weeks end.

And how do you do that? with out being viewed in a negative light? Or even communicate with other worlds... in a timely manor..

Quote

Neurohelmets are massively heavy affairs that restrict pilot vision and mobility, all for the sake of balancing a 'mech and providing a few simple HUD and targetting enhancements. But the 'mech still needs a multi-ton gyro to stay upright. Oh, and most are rigged with some sort of high-tech security system to lobotomize you if you get the start-up sequence wrong. Why not just post some extra infantry at the hanger and save the weight? Better still, just take the damn thing with you when you leave the 'mech...

I doubt by pulling the security systems you would be saving much, as for the Balance the two are working together... Though B-tech was made before the tech was available to due away with the need for the gyroscope. I would not call having 360 vision in your helmet a few simple hud elements.

Quote

Lasers are the most common battlemech weapon, yet infantry laser rifles are a rarity that few facilities can produce by the 4th Succession War. Why?

Laser weapons for infantry are quite common, their is a difference in scale, theirs a lot more infantry than vehicles. Then theirs cost, you can make a Automatic rifle for 80 C-bills, a laser rifle costs 1,250... Both need ammo / battery's. To put this into perspective for a single laser rifle I can supply two squads with Auto rifles with give them four magazines each to use. In any case the ratio of ballistic weapons to lasers are also factoring civilian ownership... and not military only.

Quote

The WoB can apparently fill the Sol system with enough Capital ships and automated assault dropships to blot out the light of the sun, yet none of the Successor States is aware of it or identifies it as a threat.

Actually the did know about it, though not to the full extent. And no it was not that many as your saying.


---------------------------
Edit:
As for weapons accuracy, any one factored into the effects of built in accuracy of the weapons?
As my AR-15 has a built in accuracy of a inch or two at 100 yards...This is known as MOA... If a B-tech weapon had a MOA of 3cm at 100 meters at 1km it would hit within a 30cm circle, 10km would be 300cm, 100km would be 3000cm so 900km would have a accuracy of some 27,000cm (or 270 meters), and that's a accurate gun by today's standards (almost sniperish).

Edited by Nebfer, 23 August 2012 - 05:48 PM.

[Melcyna]

Nebfer, on 23 August 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Well it's generally known that tanks are inferior to battlemechs in the B-tech universe, so the worse critical hit tables is no real surprise. Even so a good number of Assault class tanks can still give a battlemech a bad day.

I believe the crit tables for tanks can in part be said to be due to the inferior agility and mobility of the tank compared to the mech (it's a bit harder to side step in a tank than a biped walker), as such the rounds hitting a tank hit a bit harder...

Irrelevant technically because their projectile and weapon fire are supposed to be either very fast (much faster than current weapon), or pretty much instantaneous to human perception (light speed).

So unless if these mechwarriors are all NEO with capability to respond to movement like a fly (still doesn't explain how that helps against laser of course), and if the mech can actually MOVE with such speed and agility to match that capability... then the argument falls apart because there's no realistic chance for the mech to evade incoming fire in such a way.

In the first place a Mech which is standing with incredibly large surface area is significantly easier to shoot and hit than a ground vehicle which presents a smaller surface area, the whole point of tank design evolution is precisely to present the smallest possible surface area from the direction of the most probable incoming fire that they cannot avoid ie: the FRONT, and armor this part with the best possible protection armor can give to a mobile unit.

It is the equivalent of the comparison between the profile of a STANDING SOLDIER (a mech), and a PRONE SOLDIER (a low height ground vehicle)... which is easier to hit? yep.. there's a good reason why soldiers try to avoid presenting such a large surface area profile when under fire

Nebfer, on 23 August 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

And how do you do that? with out being viewed in a negative light? Or even communicate with other worlds... in a timely manor..

If they are going to capitulate, they will find a way... capitulating is the end of the road either way, so not acting while you are being disarmed when you actually still have the capability is even more ********.

Which ironically, in the novels they did exactly that... ie: taking over HPG stations, etc... like the Capellan did, and they sure as **** don't seems to care about the HPG personnel welfare even for that matter (they ventilated one in the head with a needler)

Nebfer, on 23 August 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

As for weapons accuracy, any one factored into the effects of built in accuracy of the weapons?
As my AR-15 has a built in accuracy of a inch or two at 100 yards...This is known as MOA... If a B-tech weapon had a MOA of 3cm at 100 meters at 1km it would hit within a 30cm circle, 10km would be 300cm, 100km would be 3000cm so 900km would have a accuracy of some 27,000cm (or 270 meters), and that's a accurate gun by today's standards (almost sniperish).

if BTech weapon had such accuracy then they are engaging at range so pitifully short that they are suggesting that their weapon bleeds energy out into it's surrounding as it travels with bleed rate so fast that it loses most of them within several hundred meters or less..

A logical fallacy either way... if it had the accuracy and bleeds energy like that then essentially they are suggesting that they are engaging within a medium like a water (or they fitted every projectile with air brake and reverse thruster), if the energy is not lost so quickly but the accuracy did then the weapons are so incredibly inaccurate that it's amazing they can wage war at all with such inaccuracy.

note: incidentally modern weapon like an APFSDS tank shell for instance, with the modern gun and aiming has a practical accuracy observed as sub minute of an angle, hence why they can hit a tank sized target from over 3km away, with the furthest record iirc of a one shot hit and disabling hit during the war at 6km with similar shell.

Sniper like accuracy? nay, vehicle mounted weapon have ranges and accuracy that are out of proportion with infantry weapon, been the case for quite a long time already, if infantries are engaging each other in sub km unit, then vehicles are engaging each other in kilometer based unit. Hence why modern cannons are fitted with anything from barrel temperature sensor, alignment sensor, practically everything conceivable to mount on a battle unit to ensure best possible accuracy in order to compete under such environment.

Edited by Melcyna, 23 August 2012 - 06:52 PM.

[Raledon]

Just wondering, if spacedrops isn't being used for some ****** reasons and the armies use only land units, where the **** is the air, artillery and infantry support for the mechs?
Assuming mechs replaced the tanks in the Btech universe, a well camouflaged infantry with anti-tank missiles should easily head-shot the mechs, killing the pilot. I've heard how missiles were used in succession to hit people hiding behind a fence (one blows a hole in the fence, the other enters into it).
Artillery should have easy time to hit a large target such as a mech, especially if it's as slow as 50km/h like the Atlas is.
Air support dropping 1ton bombs on the mechs... nuff said.
Where is the rest of the army in this world? (note- I am based more on the Mechwarrior 1-4 than the tabletop games)

[Elessar]

Raledon, on 24 August 2012 - 10:13 AM, said:

Just wondering, if spacedrops isn't being used for some ****** reasons and the armies use only land units, where the **** is the air, artillery and infantry support for the mechs?
Assuming mechs replaced the tanks in the Btech universe, a well camouflaged infantry with anti-tank missiles should easily head-shot the mechs, killing the pilot. I've heard how missiles were used in succession to hit people hiding behind a fence (one blows a hole in the fence, the other enters into it).
Artillery should have easy time to hit a large target such as a mech, especially if it's as slow as 50km/h like the Atlas is.
Air support dropping 1ton bombs on the mechs... nuff said.
Where is the rest of the army in this world? (note- I am based more on the Mechwarrior 1-4 than the tabletop games)

They exist in Battletech.
You have artillery, tanks, infantry units, helicopter as well as conventional and aerospace planes (which can drop bombs and do strafing runs) in BT.

Although armor are rather vulnerable compared to battlemechs and infantry units don´t shoot straight ... even SRM-infantry, doing damage to battlemech, but, like an SRM Lancher, each missile to another hit location of the mech (there are infantry units with anti mech training however ... they are more dangerous if they manage to get to the same hex as the mech).

Also mechs can be dropped from atmosphere or even from orbit (with special equipment) ... there is no need for the dropships to land

Unfortunately the Mechwarrior games usually only represented the Battlemech aspect of the game, with occasionally also including armor or conventional helicopters ... all other things were almost completely left out

[Banekane]

Almost all the heros are seen using old outdated Mechs tearing all the newer models to shreds

i guess its cause a mech never losses its fighting power

[Melcyna]

Incidentally on the subject of 'where's the rest of the army' be careful what you ask for...

MWLL gave a slight idea of why the system is somewhat broken in the first place... with aerospace fighters in the hand of good pilots bombing mechs, tanks, anything pretty much on the ground at their leisure to oblivion with firebombs or quad LBX20.

some pilots are good enough that they can toss firebombs from stand off distance with pin point accuracy, effectively being untouchable by anything short of other aerospace fighters.

Thanks to the ridiculously short range weaponry, aerospace fighters have incredible leeway and room to maneuver outside ground weapon effective range, and with a good pilot... you can abuse this to no tomorrow and pulverize most things on the ground with little risk.

[KalebFenoir]

In the future, targetting systems will have regressed so far that formerly fire-and-forget homing smart missiles (used today) have been reduced to 'well, it MIGHT hit in the same 60 meter area....maybe.' almost-guided rockets. (missiles have the ability to change trajectory and home in on a target, but Rockets are line-o-sight).

Putting the barrel of a Gauss Rifle up against someone's cockpit still maintains a 40% chance of completely missing the target because the gun itself can't apparently see a target closer than a significantly long distance away. Even if the barrel is poking the pilot in the eye.


On a more hilarious note, I always figured that if you rolled an obscenely low targetting roll in the TT, that instead of the mech firing in the general direction of the target and missing, that the mech fired the weapon in a completely random direction unrelated to the target, including and not limited to, straight up, straight down, backwards, into an ally nearby, into another enemy nearby, or into its own bloody torso. Made especially funny if it's a static-mount torso-mounted weapon like a laser, because, how DO you turn a one-direction Mpulse laser completely around in its socket to shoot your own rear?

Makes for more interesting play by play:

Marauder vs Atlas:

Mad: "Okay, firing my PPC. *rolls a 2* ........"
Atlas: "Uh... Okay, what now?"
Mad: "Well, apparently instead of shooting YOU like it was supposed to, my mech's arm came up, turned 90 degrees inward, and unloaded the PPC into my right torso."
Atlas: "....Should we roll to see if THAT hit... you? You know, just for fun?"
Mad: "Sure, why not. *rolls a 10* .... Seriously? It hit? Okay...where did I shoot myself then. *rolls 12* ...."
Atlas: "Wow, man. I think I just witnessed you committing harikiri there."
Mad: "....Back to the game. Let us never speak of this again."
Atlas: "Sure thing, William Tell."
Mad: "Shut up."

[Theodor Kling]

KalebFenoir, on 31 August 2012 - 08:40 AM, said:

In the future, targetting systems will have regressed so far that formerly fire-and-forget homing smart missiles (used today) have been reduced to 'well, it MIGHT hit in the same 60 meter area....maybe.' almost-guided rockets. (missiles have the ability to change trajectory and home in on a target, but Rockets are line-o-sight).

Putting the barrel of a Gauss Rifle up against someone's cockpit still maintains a 40% chance of completely missing the target because the gun itself can't apparently see a target closer than a significantly long distance away. Even if the barrel is poking the pilot in the eye.
completely around in its socket to shoot your own rear?

Although I agree about missiles, the TT rules don´t realy give you that situation wiht Gauss rifles. A hex is 30m wide, so standing right next to an enemy mech is anthing between actually touching and 60m distance.

[M E X]

Quietly Crazy, on 31 July 2012 - 12:36 AM, said:

...
-Orbital bombardments rarely occur, instead being replaced by battlemechs blowing the hell out of everything

-Faxes are still considered a valid means of transmitting private information. (If you want to avoid Comstar, at least)

-Though the entire galaxy has been searched, only the human race managed to become sentient. No other star system produced what can be considered even semi-intelligent life.
...

Looks like you are not very good at Battle Tech Lore ;P

1. Like chemical & biological weapons, Orbital Bombardments are against
the ARES CONVENTION ( http://www.sarna.net...res_Conventions )

2. We are talking about FTL ( faster than light ! ) faxes,
look here for more info : http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Black_Box

3. Please read http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Tetatae or search SARNA yourself for "Aliens" !

MfG, MEX

Edited by M E X, 17 September 2012 - 02:38 AM.

[KalebFenoir]

Theodor Kling, on 17 September 2012 - 01:46 AM, said:

Although I agree about missiles, the TT rules don´t realy give you that situation wiht Gauss rifles. A hex is 30m wide, so standing right next to an enemy mech is anthing between actually touching and 60m distance.

That's true, but considering you can both punch with one arm, and unload that nice shiny gauss shell with the other, it kinda places the other mech within a few meters. Granted, it's not like they could make a special-case rule for 'I put the barrel against the windshield' kind of thing. Even on a prone mech it's remarkably hard to take your time and aim like that. Did just that in one of my last TT rounds. prone Dasher, and I declared I was aiming for the cockpit since the guy couldn't move. Gave him the option to surrender, which he answered by firing one of the last weapons available to him. So I rolled and didn't get his head (we figured that, because I was point blank, if I missed hitting the head with an Aimed shot, then at least I was hitting SOMEthing on him, what with the gun that close). Ended up coring his reactor a few times.

For some reason now though, thinking of the shoot-and-punch combination, makes me think of all those action movies like Equilibrium and the Matrix and such....only with battlemechs, and at a much slower speed. LOL