950 replies to this topic

[DaRep]

Duncan Jr Fischer, on 31 July 2012 - 12:36 AM, said:

One of the most ridiculous facts is that in the 31 millenium some slow bipedal antropomorphic mechs are the most awesome weapons of war.

QFT. The increased profile of mechs makes them highly undesirable in a combat situation. So maybe they can cross a river without a bridge and maybe climb a hill that a tracked vehicle couldn't, but that's about it.

I find it even more amazing that in 3XXX, they haven't found a way to make the torso spin 360 degrees. I have tire pressure monitoring kits in the tires on my car now. Apparently the technology of the worm gear has been lost to the ages.

[Melcyna]

Some mech technically can spin it's torso 360 degrees, all in all though the configuration makes zero sense and non productive for the capability overall since the mech only has a single pilot (or two in the case of tandem cockpit, but both facing the same direction with apparently no imaging capability to give them clear visual of the outside that doesn't require them to use ludicrous transparent view port)...

so if the mech looks backward, the mechwarrior essentially will be traveling without him being able to see exactly where he is going.

it of course then raise the question of how the hell do they aim weapons mounted on the rear arc of the mech if they can't even put imaging system to see outside the mech without the use of view ports... but well...

i am sure as we've done multiple times before, the answer is again: LOSTECH...

part of common sense and sensibility are sadly LOSTECH too when it comes to giant bipedal war machines..

[DaRep]

Melcyna, on 17 September 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

so if the mech looks backward, the mechwarrior essentially will be traveling without him being able to see exactly where he is going.

Not sure that's necessarily a huge problem, especially if the mech isn't moving at the time. It would certainly get weapons to bear on a target behind you much more quickly. Aside from that, pilots fly planes these days without being able to visually see where they're going, all the time. Tanks roll out with the turrets locked behind them, and engage in whatever bearing necessary regardless of heading (granted a rotating turret on the tank doesn't change the orientation of the driver). However, as it stands with a mech that couldn't fully rotate the torso, it's ability to engage is constrained by heading and as such, is a highly undesirable configuration for combat.

Don't get me wrong, there's optimal positioning of the mech based upon it's armoring and visibility on heading for sure, but if you were running for a hill to cover behind it and started getting shot in the back, the ability to turn 180 at the torso, keep moving and put rounds on the target while still moving for the hill would obviously be ideal. Not having to break heading in order to engage is key.

I just chalk it up to the fact that it's all fiction and go with it. The simple truth of the matter is that in reality, a mech would be just a notch or two above the most useless weapon of war and precious little else. In urban environments, every Tom, **** and Harry with a rocket launcher from a window would be able to hit one like the broad side of a barn without much effort due to the astronomically undesirable profile. In open, flat environments, you'd see them from miles away, again due to profile. Thank god it's just a game.

[Melcyna]

Pretty much though if i may give a slightly better picture,

Pilots can fly their planes without visually see where they're going BECAUSE they have INSTRUMENTS that provides them with VITAL information of the plane's attitude.

this includes: Height, altitude, horizon indicator, bearing, speed, ground warning sensor, Radar (with transponder information overlaid) etc...

which is why a plane's HUD has most of these indicated on them and also on the cockpit (sometimes with multiple instrument for it just in case)

not to mention that in the sky, you have less problem with crashing into something (as long as your radar is functional which includes the ground sensing instrument).

When one of these instruments FAIL, the plane is in a real jeopardy if the pilot cannot see what's happening outside and THIS is one of the MAIN CAUSE of aircraft accidents around the world (ie: foggy conditions, and the plane's altimeter gave faulty indication, the result: the plane flew STRAIGHT to ground because the pilot thought he was 500 feet when he was actually only 50 feet above the ground).

Tanks are entirely different because tanks have Driver (who ALWAYS faces where the tank main hull is heading and can see all the forward arc of the tank).

The driver on the tank is responsible ENTIRELY for the tank's movement path subject to the commander's order of where he wants to go (the driver then decides how best to reach that position the commander wants). While the gunner is responsible ENTIRELY for the tank's primary weapon system application, and the commander provides the main order for each crew to follow subject to their best judgement on how to best execute that order from the commander.

On a singular pilot vehicle like a mech, essentially you cannot move and shoot at once if you cannot see where you are going...

and even if you could, chances are you can do NEITHER properly as humans are not suited for high concentration multi task hence why tanks have multiple crew (experience in the war have showed that when tanks crew are forced to multi task too many things at once like the old tank design where the commander must aim the gun and give order and maintain situational awareness, the tank's performance plummeted because the commander cannot maintain his concentration to all the task at once).

Edited by Melcyna, 18 September 2012 - 08:00 PM.

[CTsai]

Bloodweaver, on 04 August 2012 - 07:58 AM, said:

The problem -and the reason that this gets included in "ridiculous Battletech facts"- is just how inefficient heat loss is via radiation alone. As in, an object loses so little heat in a vacuum that it's negligible. Real-life spaceships have tons of systems dedicated to keeping themselves from roasting in their own crews' body heat. A heat sink simply wouldn't be efficient in a vacuum, whether or not it loses heat by radiation, because heat loss by radiation is itself inefficient. Since conduction and convection are both much more efficient, your Battlemech is going to be more effective at retaining its own heat than it will be at losing it. It's made of metal, after all... And even if a heat sink somehow did magically lose heat by radiation rapidly, it wouldn't then become more effective in arctic environments, because that is a result of conduction and convection. So there's a conflict, even assuming magic exists in BT.

I'm not exactly an expert in thermal-physics , but since modern day space crafts often employ THIS to reduce heat lost via radiation I'm assuming that radiation can be a viable mean of cooling battlemechs fighting in vacuums,

[Kaziganthi]

Exilyth, on 30 July 2012 - 03:15 PM, said:

- Space ships weighting in at multiple thousands of tons can travel faster than light by using a ridiculously small amount of energy.

I wouldn't call a jumpship having to recharge for close to a week a small about of energy

Melcyna, on 17 September 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

Some mech technically can spin it's torso 360 degrees, all in all though the configuration makes zero sense and non productive for the capability overall since the mech only has a single pilot (or two in the case of tandem cockpit, but both facing the same direction with apparently no imaging capability to give them clear visual of the outside that doesn't require them to use ludicrous transparent view port)...

so if the mech looks backward, the mechwarrior essentially will be traveling without him being able to see exactly where he is going.

it of course then raise the question of how the hell do they aim weapons mounted on the rear arc of the mech if they can't even put imaging system to see outside the mech without the use of view ports... but well...

i am sure as we've done multiple times before, the answer is again: LOSTECH...

part of common sense and sensibility are sadly LOSTECH too when it comes to giant bipedal war machines..

Which mechs can spin 360, i've never heard of any. The rifleman was disigned to be an anti aircraft mech that turso twisted left and right, but their arms could swing into the reverse arc and fire into the rear while they were tracking and shooting.

Edited by Kaziganthi, 22 September 2012 - 01:48 AM.

[lonewolfsx]

Kaziganthi, on 22 September 2012 - 01:47 AM, said:

Which mechs can spin 360, i've never heard of any. The rifleman was disigned to be an anti aircraft mech that turso twisted left and right, but their arms could swing into the reverse arc and fire into the rear while they were tracking and shooting.

I know the Mad Dog has full torso rotation for sure, probably a few others I forget. It's rare though it seems

Edited by lonewolfsx, 22 September 2012 - 06:10 AM.

[KalebFenoir]

lonewolfsx, on 22 September 2012 - 06:10 AM, said:

I know the Mad Dog has full torso rotation for sure, probably a few others I forget. It's rare though it seems

Timberwolf, Mad Dog, Warhawk, Dire Wolf... most of those should be able to torso-spin. Maybe humanoid ones like the Longbow and Rifleman and Glass Spider should be able to spin as well, since the torsos are basically turrents mounted on legs. I can see a Bane spinning its torso as well.

[TimberJon]

- Mankind agrees to something like the Ares Conventions.

[Kaziganthi]

KalebFenoir, on 22 September 2012 - 06:40 AM, said:

Timberwolf, Mad Dog, Warhawk, Dire Wolf... most of those should be able to torso-spin. Maybe humanoid ones like the Longbow and Rifleman and Glass Spider should be able to spin as well, since the torsos are basically turrents mounted on legs. I can see a Bane spinning its torso as well.

Can you point me in the direction of which rule set indicates they do, as most of the clan omni's have the same torso set-up, that would indicate they all do as well. I was always under the impression no mech could rotate more than 1 hex facing to the left or right, which indicates only a 60 degree torso rotation. But they were also able to get 1 arm into their rear arc and fire that arms mounted weapon(s).

I know the Rifleman for sure, and most likely the Blackjack. The Longbow is an artillary mech like the Catapult and I believe subject to the same restrictions.

If you could me in the right direction for the specifics, it would be a great help for the up coming battles I have planned for my gaming nights. My players have a regiment in thier pocket and are fighting off the clans

Edited by Kaziganthi, 22 September 2012 - 01:20 PM.

[KalebFenoir]

Kaziganthi, on 22 September 2012 - 01:16 PM, said:

Can you point me in the direction of which rule set indicates they do, as most of the clan omni's have the same torso set-up, that would indicate they all do as well. I was always under the impression no mech could rotate more than 1 hex facing to the left or right, which indicates only a 60 degree torso rotation. But they were also able to get 1 arm into their rear arc and fire that arms mounted weapon(s).

I know the Rifleman for sure, and most likely the Blackjack. The Longbow is an artillary mech like the Catapult and I believe subject to the same restrictions.

If you could me in the right direction for the specifics, it would be a great help for the up coming battles I have planned for my gaming nights. My players have a regiment in thier pocket and are fighting off the clans

Unfortunately there is no rule. I merely mention these ones because they appear to have the capacity for full rotation, as opposed to ones like, say, they Jagermech, which would shear off its over-the-top kneecaps if it rotated its torso too far. I suppose if you want to get critical, it could be a Level 3 + detail. I'd consider it like an optional rule; if you can look at a mech's design, and locate its waist, and judge that it could probably do a full rotation (like say, it has that nice cylinder belt waistline instead of something unflexible like most mechs), then you could argue that it could rotate.

I know in the BT cartoon (totally not canon, but I'll mention it anyway), they show Timberwolves and Mad Dogs rotating 180 degrees at the waist, as if the torso is on a 360 mount, or at least, a 180 mounting. In a way, it makes sense, looking at the design. At the waist, it does kind of look like you could rotate the whole thing backward.

In lieu of rotating torsos, mechs that don't have lower arm and hand actuators (Catapult, Jenner, Rifleman, Longbow), can flip their arms completely backward by rotating them at the shoulderjoint. The only mech I know of that might be able to do that kind of thing with full arms would be the Ryoken (with its seriously weird arms that can seemingly hinge backward at the elbows), and the Fire Moth, for a similar reason in both the elbows AND the shoulders. (one look at the Fire Moth can tell you that if it were to rotate its shoulders down to normal human positioning, its hands would be aimed BEHIND it).

If you're using basic rules, torso rotation is just the one hex left and right. But if you're using like, Master Rules, with optional rules (the stuff you make on the fly, like high speed trip damage and whether you can pick up that de-limbed 20 tonner and use it as a club), then for fairness I'd say that for certain mechs it becomes 2 hexes left or right. Maybe full rotation if you want. But I'd say to rotate THAT far, you'd need to use movement points to even things out. For each additional hex torso-twisted, make it one movement point. Or perhaps even cumulative, like, one hex turned is one point, two is an additional 2 points, and full rotation ends up a whopping 5 points?


It's all up to you and your buddies, man. Talk it out with them, see if they're game for it.

[lonewolfsx]

KalebFenoir, on 22 September 2012 - 06:40 AM, said:

Timberwolf, Mad Dog, Warhawk, Dire Wolf... most of those should be able to torso-spin. Maybe humanoid ones like the Longbow and Rifleman and Glass Spider should be able to spin as well, since the torsos are basically turrents mounted on legs. I can see a Bane spinning its torso as well.

I know for sure that the Timber Wolf and Warhawk can't spin the full 360. I'm not 100% where the official rules are for this though. Apparently there is a section on it in "BattleTech Compendium: The Rules of Warfare," but I don't have that book.

[Melcyna]

Chances are the ruleset will never allow heavy mech with the kind of loadout of a Timberwolf to be able to rotate the torso 360 degree, i mean think about it, in a table top game where part of the gameplay mechanic balance works on the unit arc coverage, the ability to rotate a full 360 degree will give things like Timberwolf the ability to essentially kite anything that has enough firepower to fight a timberwolf by simply running away from the target mech while firing with the torso facing backwards at the target.

Mechanically however, nothing prevents the unit to be able to rotate full 360 degree since the swivel arc has no physical barrier that prevents it, nor should it's movement gait be affected.

The same technically applies to many other mech including humanoid ones that have shown ability to rotate at least 90 degree to either side since many of these do so by rotating the entire upper torso, ie: the torso is separated into upper and lower torso and are independent of each other (which is how they could rotate it in the first place).

So physically at least, nothing stops them... gameplay wise however the result is predictably disastrous.

[Kaziganthi]

Thats why I was asking, I have all the BT compendiums even up to the level 3 rules and haven't located anything regarding the 360 degree torso twist. even as an optional rule.

I know some mechs by the look of their design maybe able to do, but to play fair with my guys I keep it to the 1 hex facing. Although I do allow the rule if the mech only has shoulder and upper arm actuators similar to the Rifleman, then they can flip thier arms over and change their weapon firing arc. This would be done in the torso twist phase.

[Theodor Kling]

Melcyna, on 17 September 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

Some mech technically can spin it's torso 360 degrees, all in all though the configuration makes zero sense and non productive for the capability overall since the mech only has a single pilot (or two in the case of tandem cockpit, but both facing the same direction with apparently no imaging capability to give them clear visual of the outside that doesn't require them to use ludicrous transparent view port)...

so if the mech looks backward, the mechwarrior essentially will be traveling without him being able to see exactly where he is going.

it of course then raise the question of how the hell do they aim weapons mounted on the rear arc of the mech if they can't even put imaging system to see outside the mech without the use of view ports... but well...

part of common sense and sensibility are sadly LOSTECH too when it comes to giant bipedal war machines..

The visual information is there: On the famous 360° conpressed to 120° screen in the cockpit, with nearly no compression in front view part and stronger to the sides. That never featured in the games , because, well...if you ever set a game to give you a compressed 360°view via console commands ( Deus Ex could do that for example, so I guess all games with the original Unreal engine can) you would know that can take some getting used to
But yeah.. in general common sense is lostech.

[KalebFenoir]

Theodor Kling, on 24 September 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

The visual information is there: On the famous 360° conpressed to 120° screen in the cockpit, with nearly no compression in front view part and stronger to the sides. That never featured in the games , because, well...if you ever set a game to give you a compressed 360°view via console commands ( Deus Ex could do that for example, so I guess all games with the original Unreal engine can) you would know that can take some getting used to
But yeah.. in general common sense is lostech.

Wow. I totally forgot about the 360 squeezed into 120. Dang. LOL. Can you imagine if they implimented that now? Adjusted the view so you could see basically your own backside in the peripheral vision? It'd squeeze every mech down to almost a line, and you'd REALLY be using the R-target button to figure out who's who. No wonder IS pilots had issue trying to figure out the Timberwolf. Their IFF comps would go into conniptions, flicking between an MAD and a CAT. And the pilot wouldn't be able to identify better because the image on his screen would be squeezed into a flatter version of the truth, possibly making it hard to see the arms.

I think later book authors forgot about the vision thing, and made it so what you see on your screen is what's in front of you. I don't recall hearing it mentioned in the last few 'latest' books of the old BT universe.

[Melcyna]

Or alternatively they wised up and realized the concept is fairly nonsensical to start with since by compressing 360 degree view into 120 the pilot loses direct reference on the actual bearing since things on the screen no longer match his normal perception bearing...

This is fine in a strictly observation position such as an overwatch scout watching for movement, but disastrous when the same person has to make rapid and accurate action based on said information (ie: gunnery and movement action).

Incidentally that also raises the question that if they have the capability for panoramic display inside the cockpit then why the hell do they build their battlemech with obvious head and canopy design like they are asking to be shot.

Edited by Melcyna, 25 September 2012 - 10:51 PM.

[KalebFenoir]

Melcyna, on 25 September 2012 - 10:37 PM, said:

Or alternatively they wised up and realized the concept is fairly nonsensical to start with since by compressing 360 degree view into 120 the pilot loses direct reference on the actual bearing since things on the screen no longer match his normal perception bearing...

This is fine in a strictly observation position such as an overwatch scout watching for movement, but disastrous when the same person has to make rapid and accurate action based on said information (ie: gunnery and movement action).

Incidentally that also raises the question that if they have the capability for panoramic display inside the cockpit then why the hell do they build their battlemech with obvious head and canopy design like they are asking to be shot.

Well I know they experimented with Chest-mounted cockpits; The Cyclops had one, and a few other mechs...and if you look at some designs, you can probably argue that they too have chest-pits but people were too lazy to just attribute it to that. LoL I agree 360-in-120 is nonsensical. You wouldn't be able to do the Hunchie's urban combat very well if you were smacking buildings left and right.

No idea why they still make 'heads'.... maybe it's just a hold-over. Easier to slap an effectively premade cockpit ontop of a mech's body and tie it into the systems than to engineer an engine in such a way as to make room for a pilot seat nearby it. Additional engineering or something. Too costly.

Meh. Hardly matters. Means you don't have to grind through a torso to get to the pilot. Works for me. XD I can totally see an Atlas pulling a Shining Finger on some other mech's head, right now though. Makes me smile.

[Ian Thoreau]

gratuitous. Battletech has always been a ridiculously stupid concept with horrifically bad design, from a theme standpoint. The fact that it's still fun to play despite it's atrocious design is a testament to mankind's love for fighting robots.

You can talk about silly things like a targeting computer for a laser that you're aiming at a 10 story tall target that's only a quarter of a mile away and only moves 30mph, or said targeting computer's weight being measured in tons, but it's ridiculous. The basic concept of Battletech is broken. Over the next millenium we develop water-powered space-folding technology (which I think is a dumb idea but at least it's debatable, conceptual science), terraform and colonize hundreds of worlds, and then spend so long at war that we forget how to design new military equipment? We still have working equipment, we even have working factories to produce said equipment, but we can't figure out our own technology that makes it work? Every "new" weapon FASA introduced until game year 3050 or so was described as having the blueprints being found in some old cache. Can you imagine needing Indiana Jones to dig up the blueprints for an F-14 from some ancient temple because we forgot how to make them, despite still having factories actively producing them? It's just a stupid concept.

[Arctic Fox]

Ian Thoreau, on 26 September 2012 - 06:03 PM, said:

gratuitous. Battletech has always been a ridiculously stupid concept with horrifically bad design, from a theme standpoint. The fact that it's still fun to play despite it's atrocious design is a testament to mankind's love for fighting robots.

You can talk about silly things like a targeting computer for a laser that you're aiming at a 10 story tall target that's only a quarter of a mile away and only moves 30mph, or said targeting computer's weight being measured in tons, but it's ridiculous. The basic concept of Battletech is broken. Over the next millenium we develop water-powered space-folding technology (which I think is a dumb idea but at least it's debatable, conceptual science), terraform and colonize hundreds of worlds, and then spend so long at war that we forget how to design new military equipment? We still have working equipment, we even have working factories to produce said equipment, but we can't figure out our own technology that makes it work? Every "new" weapon FASA introduced until game year 3050 or so was described as having the blueprints being found in some old cache. Can you imagine needing Indiana Jones to dig up the blueprints for an F-14 from some ancient temple because we forgot how to make them, despite still having factories actively producing them? It's just a stupid concept.

I'm curious, what do you mean by "water-powered space-folding technology"? I'm assuming you're referring to the K-F Drive, but there is nothing water-powered about it that I know of.

Also, targeting computers weigh tons because they are not just computers; the weight includes all the mechanical equipment needed to aim weapons more accurately.