950 replies to this topic

[Freeride Forever]

AXE MURDERER, on 06 August 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

-In 1140 years, people haven't figured out how to stop beating others up for lunch money.
-War has been changed so that instead of a planet-wracking war every 30 years, we have a known-universe-wracking war every 100
-Christianity still exists (I'm sorry, but Jesus OUGHT to have come by NOW)
-Clanners decided best way to divvy up stuff was killing each other (Might Makes Right still in full effect)
-LAMs. Need I say more?

"Christianity still exists." LOL don't apologize for that. In 1140 years, even without contact with alien life it'd be absolutely ridiculous!! It's absolutely ridiculous even now!!!!

[Theodor Kling]

Brenden, on 06 August 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

I wonder.. Why all the different brands of lasers, balistics and rockets, if they all do the same? What's the difference between a Diverse Optics Type II Medium laser and it's Type III model? What makes a Cyclops-Eye Large Laser better than a Sunbeam Large Laser?
Why Martell over Diverse Optics?

Not exactley sure about the lasers. might be different wavelengths ( and maybe because of that different efectivenes agaisnt different armour plates, depindingon THEIR manufacturer). Or slightly different ranges , recharge times, heat development. The game rules of course simplify that a bit, since doe a board game it is not practical to have a laser that can shoot half a hex further for 0.3 points more of heat,, or one that does 0.2 less heat while nevertheless firering just a bit faster....
For ACs it is stated that the 2/5/10/20 is more or less a damage per salvo rating. So some get it with lot´s of bulletts in the air, some increase calibre. And judging fro mpictures given in book, the barel length and consequently accuracy and possiblly range will have quite some spread. the AC on a Marrauder looks a lot like a medium calibre long range vaiant, whereas the one in a Centurions arm looks more like a short ranged high calibre one.
Another factor for all weaponsmight be: one manufacturere might make his weapons al ittle more compact then another... so if you want to fit the m in lighter mechs you choose those despite the bigger pricetag. ( Game rules grant the same amount of internal space to a Flea and a Stone Rhino but realisticly this is not likeley)

Grendel408, on 06 August 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

Another odd fact:
Standard democratic governments (like those of today [the present]) don't work in the future, but feudilism works like a charm (except in the FWL lol) for the most part...

Feudalism seemst o have been the primary means of goverment when ( and where) evver communications between population centers was slow, making decentraliation neccesary. In that respect BT is rather close to medival Europe, or China .

Freeride Forever, on 06 August 2012 - 10:21 PM, said:

"Christianity still exists." LOL don't apologize for that. In 1140 years, even without contact with alien life it'd be absolutely ridiculous!! It's absolutely ridiculous even now!!!!

Religions tend to endure a while. And to be fair: Budhism, Hinduism and Islam also still exist in BT

[Elsydeon]

Melcyna, on 05 August 2012 - 05:36 PM, said:

B. weapon range... if one propel a gauss rifle slug on atmospheric condition, that slug is realistically not going to travel that far relatively speaking before external forces render it ineffective through energy bleed....

but the same slug in space would travel to literally until it is either caught in the gravity well of something suitably powerful or until it smash something and impart it's kinetic energy to it, and that something can be 150million kilometer away from the point of firing and it wouldn't make much of a difference in effectiveness of the slug destructiveness as long as the slug mass is significant enough to ensure no particles in the way causes too much interference.

Sir Issac Newton is the deadliest son of a ***** in space!

[Elessar]

Sidney, on 06 August 2012 - 06:34 PM, said:

....
In fact, the split between the Roman Catholic church on Terra and the Catholic Church on New Avalon in the Federated Suns even mimics the split between the Catholic and Orthodox churches after the Western and Eastern Roman Empires fell.
...

In fact for the timeframe you have given it would make more sense, that Word of Blake mimics the split of Protestantism from the catholic church.
Especially considering the fact that it saw the whole, formerly catholic, european world "suddenly" be divided in catholic and protestant principalities, finally culminated into a brutal civil war protestant and still catholic principalities within the holy roman empire. The 30 years war, which depopulated whole regions in germany (and saw the utter destruction of Magdeburg, one of the major german trade centres in germany).

[Theodor Kling]

Elsydeon, on 06 August 2012 - 11:15 PM, said:

Sir Issac Newton is the deadliest son of a ***** in space!

The right quote in the right place

[Freeride Forever]

I haven't read through all the comments, but has anyone mentioned anything about gravity? Is it the same on all planets? Do mechs run the same speeds, and jump to the same heights & sustain the same damage from falling on all planets? If so, then why? An Atlas weighs 100 tons & runs 54 km/hour (is it also stupid that speed is represented in metric but weight is not?) on Earth, but are those values the same on every planet it does business on? Is every planet the same size & density? If it is, then this is one of the lamest facts of all, and I think it should be changed immediately, canonical or not, it adds a very exciting parameter to gameplay & provides another avenue for assigning advantages to heavies and lights. Like maybe jump jets are useless or close to it depending on how strong the gravity is and an Atlas may not even be able to walk up a hill that it could walk up on another planet. Regardless of the implications to gameplay, I think it's pretty stupid if all planets have the same gravity.

[Elessar]

Nope they do not ...
there are rules for different gravity, atmosphere (and lack thereof) and temperature in Battletech TT.
There are even rules für submerged combat

Edited by Elessar, 07 August 2012 - 12:43 AM.

[Mousehold]

Sidney, on 06 August 2012 - 06:34 PM, said:

Well, the point of the game was to be a 'western' approach to the 'mech' manga out of Japan.

I don't think it's necessarially racist, considering that while it's very much a 'future of the 80s', the political factions aren't. They're medival. Battletech has been stated to have been a concept of juxtapositioning two contrasting periods: The European Medivial Dark Ages and a futuristic setting.

All the factions can be traced back to their real world warring counterparts of the middle ages, circa 1000AD:

-The Star League is the fallen Roman Empire
-The Federated Suns are the anglo-saxons who had been invaded by the French (Hence both English and French influences)
-The Lyran Commonwealth is the germanic states
-Draconis Combine is Imperial Japan
-The Cappellan Confederation is China, which had been reuinted under a single dynasty
-The Free Worlds League is the Slavic States
-The Clans are the Mongols
-And, finally, Comstar was the Catholic Church, right down to the religious order and (at least appearing) to try to maintain neutrality, protect knowledge and offering hope.

In fact, the split between the Roman Catholic church on Terra and the Catholic Church on New Avalon in the Federated Suns even mimics the split between the Catholic and Orthodox churches after the Western and Eastern Roman Empires fell.

Now, I'll admit, I'm Canadian- and white- so my knowledge of India circa 1000AD isn't very good, but it's my understanding that this was a very 'dark' time for India, and its main contribution to the world at that point was Buddhism which had spread to China. Likewise, the Byzantine Empire had already fallen as noted.

That could be my Western education's bias, of course, and if India was a major player on the world stage during the Middle Ages, please feel free to correct me.

EDIT: Forgot to add that it was Jordan Weisman that explained the concept of Battletech, just like the game "Crimson Skies" was a combination of the WWI time period with Pirates, so too was Battletech the future with the Medival Ages.

The combination can also be seen with Mechwarriors being knights- owners of land that were of nobility, while the unwashed common peasant are infantry or vehicle crews.

That's a fair assessment, but I still have to say it's fairly obvious this is heavily biased by the sensibilities of white American nerds in the 1980s. I'm not calling anyone racist--everyone has that kind of cultural bias--but my more modern self finds it to be rather dissatisfying. It's very evident in the factions which were chosen to be represented and those which were not, as well as how they're represented.

Japan is grossly over represented by the Draconis Combine if we're talking about mirroring the 11th century. It was pretty insignificant at the time, while China was (as it was for most of history) the technological and military superpower of Asia. (And Liao is Khitan, not Chinese!) I understand that Japan "made" the giant robot genre what it is and deserves some credit, but that wasn't your argument.

Likewise I would expect to see a significant faction to represent the Fatimid Caliphate from this era, which is infinitely more relevant than Japan would ever be in medieval Europe. I don't know much about India in the period, but they're such a historically and geographically important nation that they deserve to be represented.

You could also use the Mongol invasion of Europe as your historical reference point, but it doesn't change much.

I wish the community wasn't so clingy and stubborn about their game and fiction, because it's really time for a complete overhaul of everything.

Anyway, this thread is about the ridiculousness of Battletech, and I still think it's pretty ridiculous if you think about it.

[Pht]

Maybe this thread should be renamed "ridiculous battletech misconceptions" ... :|

PaintedWolf, on 30 July 2012 - 02:09 PM, said:

-In the future, weapons will have amazing ranges. Like 50% accuracy at 180 meters!

Weapons with more than 12 hexes range can successfully shoot stuff 35 miles away.

Quote

-A mech can survive 15-20 missiles, but 1 AC-20 shot will cripple it.

Lets see... 1 point of damage per missile, spread out across the target, vs 20 points of damage, all concentrated in one section...

Elessar, on 31 July 2012 - 12:02 AM, said:

-A giant 100t battlemech with its huge size that has to be armored is less vulnerable than a 100t tank (despite the fact that we can assume that said tank is more compact and therefore could be much thicker armored with the same weight of armor)

Said 100 ton battlemech is less vulnerable because it can surive a CRAPLOAD more internal damage than the tank. All you have to do to take the tank out is blast off a wheel/tred/hoverskirt or put *one* round into the cockpit, thereby slaggng the crew inside into red mist.

Thaliesin, on 31 July 2012 - 12:55 AM, said:

- Big guns have short range, while small guns have long range.

Pardon? Gauss ... "THE" big guns ... have really long ranges.

Maybe you mean ac20s vs, say, ac2s? ... of course they have shorter effective ranges, they fire a huge swarm of bullets, not one relatively larger round.

Quote

Battletech is not about realism, it's about fun...

Amen.

Theodor Kling, on 31 July 2012 - 01:29 AM, said:

Computer systems capable of controlling a fusion power plant inside a moving, jumping, falling etc mech are not capable of getting a decent aim for the weapons.

? Take out the human element (the gunnery rolls) and the 'mechs are obscenely capable of hitting mobile, mech sized targets.

What they can't do is get all of those weapons to hit a single point... if they could, BT would be just another anime mecha game, where mechs would have to be stupid-precise AND accurate to hit their targets. Of course, most anime mecha have to do this because their targets are flying gymnasts and doing backflips off of walls...

Quote

• Despite mechs positivly glowing from their exess heat, heat seeking missiles are absent.
  
• A 100 ton metal mosnter with a fusion reaktor that screams lowdly "HERE" in infrared, on a magnetometer, and probably also in gamma radiation can HIDE behind a building.

There are heat seeking missiles...

It can only hide as long as someone doesn't have bap, you mean.


If we're going to crack jokes, let's at least get it right about the things we are cracking jokes on!

[Elessar]

Pht, on 07 August 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:

...
Said 100 ton battlemech is less vulnerable because it can surive a CRAPLOAD more internal damage than the tank. All you have to do to take the tank out is blast off a wheel/tred/hoverskirt or put *one* round into the cockpit, thereby slaggng the crew inside into red mist.
...

Hoverskirt, Wheels and tracks are vulnerable, yes.


But crew (who reside inside the turret and body of the tank) and internals ae protected by layers of armor that can be much thicker than those of an Atlas.
Why?
Because a tank has a much smaller surface area than a battlemech (if you doubt it look at a Pzkfw VIII Maus ... with ~190t almost double the weight of an Atlas ... and even this tank has less surface area than a 17m high battlemech, like the Atlas) .
Not to forget that the underside of the tank is practically out of reach for battlemech weapons and therefore can have less armor (weight that can be used to put even more armor on the other parts of the tank instead).

You can even amor the sides and fronts/backs of the tracks, so that most of the tracks/wheels are proteced by armor (making it difficult to hit or even destroy them ) (example would, once again the Pzkfw VIII Maus)

Also, just like a battlemech, a tank could have a fusion engine (instead of an ICE one) making it even more comparable to a battlemech (just with thicker amor). Not to forget that any exhaust openings could be put to the underside of the tank ... you won´t a similar place (that cannot be reached this easily by weapons) on a mech

That a tracked vehicle according to BT TT rules has not only, with every hit, just a 45% chance of the hit simply damaging the armor (and not having more severe consequences), but also has an almost 20% chance of an "armor pierced critical" (that with a 50% probability of an instant vehicle destruction) therefore sounds rather illogical to me

(and btw. I say this despite the fact that I enjoy Battletech ... I just don´t see it as a reason to refrain pointing out differences betwen BT and reality ... I also enjoy the Star Wars movies (well, parts 4-6 to be more exactly) despite the fact that everyone with even simple knowledge of physics knows, that real spacefighters wouldn´t fly like jetplanes in space (which is the way they are depicted in SW) )

Edited by Elessar, 07 August 2012 - 01:43 PM.

[Pht]

Elessar, on 07 August 2012 - 01:39 PM, said:

But crew (who reside inside the turret and body of the tank) and internals ae protected by layers of armor that can be much thicker than those of an Atlas.

Yes, the armor can be thicker. That doesn't stop, say, a heavy gauss slug from punching a hole in the armor. One has to realize that, physically, BTU armor is UBER thin for the protection it provides... so if you give it the right kind of kinetic push, it shatters, like glass. This is why the armor has to have a web of titanium to support it - it's super-super hard and thin, from a few CM to a MM most of the time. Bend the armor enough to push the titanium webbing, and the armor shatters.

Even on the atlas, most of the armor is going to be less than 1 inch thick.

The other thing is that, yes, while they can have somewhat more concentrated armor -I think they're still under the rule that one point of internal structure can only support 2 points of armor - they don't have obscenely thicker armor, such that it will stop all penetration. Especially when one considers that tanks move more slowly, and are thus easier targets - they tend to take more fire.

Quote

That a tracked vehicle according to BT TT rules has not only, with every hit, just a 45% chance of the hit simply damaging the armor (and not having more severe consequences), but also has an almost 20% chance of an "armor pierced critical" (that with a 50% probability of an instant vehicle destruction) therefore sounds rather illogical to me

Pardon my lack math here, but does not the average battlemech suffer the same chance of a TAC, when the extra number of sections are mathematically taken into acount and rendered neutral, thus giving a true apples to apples comparison?

In other words, if a 'mech had the same number of sections that a tank has, would not the TAC percentage be the same?

The other factor is that tanks require crews ... take any one of them out of action, and the tank is neturalized in terms of battlefied effectiveness.

Myomers ... they are the BT version of "rubber science win." They make 'mechs the kings of the battlefield, even versus units with the same class of armor.

Quote

(and btw. I say this despite the fact that I enjoy Battletech ... I just don´t see it as a reason to refrain pointing out differences betwen BT and reality ... I also enjoy the Star Wars movies (well, parts 4-6 to be more exactly) despite the fact that everyone with even simple knowledge of physics knows, that real spacefighters wouldn´t fly like jetplanes in space (which is the way they are depicted in SW) )

Bench racing. It's fun.

Edited by Pht, 07 August 2012 - 02:14 PM.

[Vanir]

Fun Facts:

Your standard current day main battle tank, M1 Abrams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams

Dimensions: 26x12x8
Weight: 60 Tons
Main Armament: 120mm Cannon (Effectively an AC20)
True effective range: 4000-8000m
Max Speed: 40kph Off-road, 56kph road


Fun Facts

- 120 LRM Missiles weighs 1 ton. (~17lb/missle)
- MG ammo weighs 200rounds/ton - (10lb/bullet)
- Gauss Slugs (Simple hunks of metal) can explode and weigh 250lb each.
- Jenners can stand up after being knocked down... how?!?

- The M829A3 (M1 Abrams Tank 120mm rounds) weigh roughly 46lb a piece. Roughly 43 rounds/ton.

[Melcyna]

Pht, on 07 August 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

Yes, the armor can be thicker. That doesn't stop, say, a heavy gauss slug from punching a hole in the armor. One has to realize that, physically, BTU armor is UBER thin for the protection it provides... so if you give it the right kind of kinetic push, it shatters, like glass. This is why the armor has to have a web of titanium to support it - it's super-super hard and thin, from a few CM to a MM most of the time. Bend the armor enough to push the titanium webbing, and the armor shatters.

Even on the atlas, most of the armor is going to be less than 1 inch thick.

The other thing is that, yes, while they can have somewhat more concentrated armor -I think they're still under the rule that one point of internal structure can only support 2 points of armor - they don't have obscenely thicker armor, such that it will stop all penetration. Especially when one considers that tanks move more slowly, and are thus easier targets - they tend to take more fire.



Pardon my lack math here, but does not the average battlemech suffer the same chance of a TAC, when the extra number of sections are mathematically taken into acount and rendered neutral, thus giving a true apples to apples comparison?

In other words, if a 'mech had the same number of sections that a tank has, would not the TAC percentage be the same?

The other factor is that tanks require crews ... take any one of them out of action, and the tank is neturalized in terms of battlefied effectiveness.
Bench racing. It's fun.

Actually
"Yes, the armor can be thicker. That doesn't stop, say, a heavy gauss slug from punching a hole in the armor."
it does...

it's an illogical physical sense otherwise...

to see why there is a logical failure here, think about it

Let's say a tank concentrated 3 inch of armor thickness in it's frontal glacis, and the Atlas have 1 inch even thickness across it's frontal surface.

if a gauss slug fails to penetrate the Atlas armor, it would fail to penetrate the tank frontal armor as well... a penetrator that fails X thickness of material have no logical sense to be able to penetrate 3X thickness of the same material.

if the gauss slug can penetrate the tank frontal armor, it would penetrate the Atlas frontal armor EVERY SINGLE time without failure. Again it's simply illogical that if a gauss slug can penetrate 3X thickness of a given material and fail to penetrate X thickness. Unless one wants to argue that angle of deflection counts here in which case the mech loses everytime since humanoid design by virtue of it's posture is guaranteed to have the worst possible deflection chance.

If one wants to argue that it somehow shatters and catastrophically fail with more thickness or mass then all they'd do is reduce the size of EACH OF THE BRITTLE armor layer into smaller segments and layer more of them instead with supporting layer in between and sandwich them.

essentially you end up with a scale armor design, with each piece being no larger than the largest size the material can take while still retaining the hard property.

Or alternatively, they'd just use multiple flat layer of the armor and sandwich them the old fashion way like the composite armor that tank uses anyway (and Mech armor supposed to work in the same manner).

Battletech armor system never made sense really... because an armor thick enough to withstand direct hit from the highest kinetic impact like say a gauss rifle for example would be COMPLETELY immune to machine gun rounds (technically they are autocannon rounds but for some reason they call it machine guns despite them having autocannon caliber).

It's basically the equivalent of saying that you can eventually penetrate a tank with an assault rifle if you fired enough rounds into the armor.

In Battletech, essentially all armor works like ablative armor for some reason regardless of what hit them... be it kinetic projectile, or direct heat from laser.

Pht, on 07 August 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

Even on the atlas, most of the armor is going to be less than 1 inch thick. Especially when one considers that tanks move more slowly, and are thus easier targets - they tend to take more fire.

The probability of being hit IN THE REAL WORLD under the assumption of an optimal gunnery, depends on how fast the target moves (countered by how fast the weapon can track it), how agile the target is (countered to an extent by how fast the projectile is and by guided munition), and how LARGE THE SURFACE AREA OF THE TARGET IS...

the last part is one of the reason why large bipedal machine is not feasible as combat vehicle, they have GIGANTIC surface area essentially the equivalent of a walking target board.

a tank on the other hand is designed to present the smallest possible surface area especially from the front where their armor is concentrated, this is why tank as time goes gets lower and lower in stature and profile.

incidentally 1 inch of armor is LUDICROUSLY THIN, so thin that our armored jeep carry about as much as that, our tank carry about 10 times the thickness frontally if not more.

Pht, on 07 August 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

Myomers ... they are the BT version of "rubber science win." They make 'mechs the kings of the battlefield, even versus units with the same class of armor.

Which they then contradict themselves in their techmanual by saying that they are not very efficient at converting electricity into useful work, which physically makes the entire concept even more implausible since that means a tank equipped with a fusion engine and efficient motor (standard motor for example is nearly 90% efficient, high efficiency motor currently goes as high as 95% efficient) a fusion engine output and a high efficiency motor would pretty much allow a 100 ton tank to zip like a rocket.

Edited by Melcyna, 07 August 2012 - 04:16 PM.

[Elessar]

Pht, on 07 August 2012 - 02:06 PM, said:

.....
Pardon my lack math here, but does not the average battlemech suffer the same chance of a TAC, when the extra number of sections are mathematically taken into acount and rendered neutral, thus giving a true apples to apples comparison?
...

Well, I think the thing about thicker amor has already been answered by Melcyna...
as for the math behind to hit rolls:
Nope, vehicles use a different hit table than battlemechs.
It has the vehicle divided into 4 body and 4 turret quadrants (into which you can locate armor).
If a weapon hits, they basically just look into which quadrant the slug falls and afterwards roll (like for a battlemech), but with a hit table, that has, crits in 6 of the 11 possible values that you can roll.

To sum the probabilities up (I made a mistake with my former assessment (as probabilities for 2 rolled dice follow a gauss curve) btw. but Ihave corrected this in this list): (Probability in percent vs. outcome)
Attack from Front/back:
5.5 % = Critical armor piercing hit (which, in 50% of the cases is fatal)
5.5 % = Turret lock (i.e. turret remains in position it had befoe attack)
5.5 % = 0 Movement Points (as track gets destroyed)
8,3 % = -1 MP (as drive gets damaged)
-> 25 % probability total for something critical

Attack from Side:
5.5 % = Critical armor piercing hit (which, in 50% of the cases is fatal)
5.5 % = Turret lock (i.e. turret remains in position it had befoe attack)
25 % = 0 Movement Points (as track gets destroyed)
-> total of 36.1 % for some kind of critical hit

(all of this, while the armor is full intact)

Not take for comparison a battlemech:
Hits from front back:
2.77 % = Chance for CT Critical (but with 58% [roll of 2-7] there is no critical hit)

Hits from side:
2.77 % = Chance for LT/RT Critical (but with 58% [roll of 2-7] there is no critical hit)

Considering the fact that these hit location rolls are done for every weapon (even an MG/small laser), these values are more than slightly skewed in favor of the battlemech.

Lets state an example:
A heavily armored 100t tank gets frontally attacked by 10 battlemech MGs..
despite the fact that they would, with just 20 damage, only dent the armor, the tank after these 10 attacks will be with aprobability of:
~25% = dead (because of ammo explosion, crew death, or fuel tank hit)
~46 % = have 0 MP
~58 % = have lost at least 1 MP

(I have calculated the values independently, therefore their sum is > 100 % (the tank could, for example, lose with one attack 1 MP and with the next attack get destroyed (or lose all of its MP))

A battlemech however would just laugh about such an attack
as there is just a chance of 11%, that not only any of these 10 MGs pierced the Torso armor (by rolling a 2), but that the mechpilot afterwards in the crit roll also rolled an 8 or higher, in order to really get 1-3 critical hits (and even if it resulted in one or more criticals, chances are high that the mech will be damaged, but still be in a condition to continue combat)

Edited by Elessar, 07 August 2012 - 04:08 PM.

[Sidney]

Vanir, on 07 August 2012 - 02:07 PM, said:

Fun Facts:

Your standard current day main battle tank, M1 Abrams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams

Dimensions: 26x12x8
Weight: 60 Tons
Main Armament: 120mm Cannon (Effectively an AC20)
True effective range: 4000-8000m
Max Speed: 40kph Off-road, 56kph road


Fun Facts

- 120 LRM Missiles weighs 1 ton. (~17lb/missle)
- MG ammo weighs 200rounds/ton - (10lb/bullet)
- Gauss Slugs (Simple hunks of metal) can explode and weigh 250lb each.
- Jenners can stand up after being knocked down... how?!?

- The M829A3 (M1 Abrams Tank 120mm rounds) weigh roughly 46lb a piece. Roughly 43 rounds/ton.

Like it or not, the Abrams and it's kin (Leopard 2 A5 what have you) are in the Battletech universe. They use either a Light, Medium, or Heavy "Rifle" which have damage profiles similiar to the AC2, 5 and 10 respecitvely.

However, when being used against anything with Age of War or later armour (such as Battlemech armour) they need to succeed a roll to deal any damage whatsoever.

The armour is similiar to Supply Vehicle armour with a 'Base Armour Rating' or 'BAR'. If damage exceeds the BAR, you punch through the armour and start generating critical hits.

As for the AC20, the size of its shells depends on the manufacturer, but the Clan UAC20 on the Cauldron Born/Ebon Jaguar is 203mm.

And one 'round' is a burst of several shells.

[Melcyna]

Sidney, on 07 August 2012 - 04:06 PM, said:

Like it or not, the Abrams and it's kin (Leopard 2 A5 what have you) are in the Battletech universe. They use either a Light, Medium, or Heavy "Rifle" which have damage profiles similiar to the AC2, 5 and 10 respecitvely.

However, when being used against anything with Age of War or later armour (such as Battlemech armour) they need to succeed a roll to deal any damage whatsoever.

The armour is similiar to Supply Vehicle armour with a 'Base Armour Rating' or 'BAR'. If damage exceeds the BAR, you punch through the armour and start generating critical hits.

As for the AC20, the size of its shells depends on the manufacturer, but the Clan UAC20 on the Cauldron Born/Ebon Jaguar is 203mm.

And one 'round' is a burst of several shells.

That last part is one of the other anomaly...

if the projectile are intended to penetrate, then firing a burst of several shells that are not aligned in the same path is the most counter productive method as it cut each sub projectile mass and penetration capability.

If the claim is that they use HEAP rounds, then that is equally odd as HEAP, or rather AP HE, failure to penetrate result in the HE charge prematurely detonating resulting in no real damage either (and even less penetration chance in fact since it has less mass than pure kinetic energy projectile thanks to the HE charge mass displacement).

if the claim is that they meant HEAT rounds, then that still makes no sense since HEAT effect is EXTREMELY dependent on both the shaped charge size and liner material used, neither benefiting from a burst of several shells instead of one larger shell.

If the burst is intended to improve probability of hitting then that becomes COUNTER INTUITIVE with the claim that their ACs primary limitation in range are the result of the burst fire... because essentially that means that AC limited effective range is the result of the burst fire, which ITSELF is intended to improve hit rate which is essentially an effort to improve effective range.

These incidentally are some of the reason why Tanks are not equipped with rapid firing gun for engaging other tanks, and instead equipped with the largest high velocity gun.that can still fit into the tank's parameter

Edited by Melcyna, 07 August 2012 - 05:54 PM.

[Rot]

You are all nerds,.. but so am I

[Sidney]

Melcyna, on 07 August 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

That last part is one of the other anomaly...

It's often referred to as 'FASA Physics' and the like. The Classic Battletech forum often uses the term 'FASAnomics' to explain the way Houses spend so little on their militaries and a single lance of 'mechs (and a light one at that) can take and hold a planet with a population in the millions.

Melcyna, on 07 August 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

if the projectile are intended to penetrate, then firing a burst of several shells that are not aligned in the same path is the most counter productive method as it cut each sub projectile mass and penetration capability.

It's not intended to penetrate. That's the thing. Vehicles- and especially 21st and 22nd era ones- suffer this liability. 'Mechs do not. Hence why crtiical hits can be hit when armour is remaining, especially 22nd era or earlier armour.

Putting enough 'primitive' armour on a 'mech so it has a BAR of 7 allows any weapon that deals 7 damage or more to 'penetrate' and obtain critical hits. Modern armour needs to be removed to a sufficient degree for critical hits and internal damage to be done.

Hence the shift in weapon philosophy. Weapons are designed to weaken the armour as much as it can in a location.

Melcyna, on 07 August 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

These incidentally are some of the reason why Tanks are not equipped with rapid firing gun for engaging other tanks, and instead equipped with the largest high velocity gun.that can still fit into the tank's parameter

And that's why real world guns don't compare to what exists in Battletech. They don't play by the same rules- Gauss Rifles in space combat exceed speeds of Mach...15? 16? Something like that- and yet an Aerospace fighter can easily shrug them off because they have armour that's a few mm thick.

Battlemechs use very similiar armour, that can also easily stop such weapons...yet if they fall down, the armour shatters like glass.

[Vanir]

ACs are funky. Some are described as a single bullet from a large barrel, while other ACs of the same caliber can be a salvo of lower grade munitions.

One, specifically the http://www.sarna.net...usher_SH_Cannon is described as a 10shot burst of 150mm shells, which is frankly STUPID AS HELL! The recoil on that sort of mechanism would be insane, but whatever...

'Super' Armor indeed if anything could stand up to that. I still say the nose cannon of a A10 Warthog would core any mech in seconds.

FASAnomics, FASAysics, lol....

a 250lb gauss slug, (8 rounds to ton), traveling at Mach6 puts out roughly 1.7420e+8 foot-pounds of force, roughly over 5% of a ton of TNT. Up that to mach 12 and your talking about 20% of a ton of TNT.

Nevermind that the recoil would tear the arm right off the firing mech, but the impact? How would anything remain standing from an impact like that? The shock transfer would kill a pilot in his cockpit, regardless of if the armor is breached. Were not talking about some psudo-science mass effect or inertial dampening fields, they take that in straight armor.

Edited by Vanir, 07 August 2012 - 07:04 PM.

[Sidney]

Vanir, on 07 August 2012 - 06:57 PM, said:

Nevermind that the recoil would tear the arm right off the firing mech, but the impact? How would anything remain standing from an impact like that? The shock transfer would kill a pilot in his cockpit, regardless of if the armor is breached. Were not talking about some psudo-science mass effect or inertial dampening fields, they take that in straight armor.

Aerospace fighters and dropships use the same Gauss Rifles Battlemechs d o(Sub capital Gauss Rifles anyway for Dropships). On a Battletech mapsheet, they have the same damage and range as they do on a Battlemech.

When the fighter or dropship goes into space, the turns become 60 seconds long (instead of 10 seconds), and the hexes become 18Km across (instead of 30m). A Gauss Rifle in space reaches out to 20 hexes, or 360Km.

But just like a Gauss Rifle doesn't take a full 10 seconds to cross 22 Hexes (660m) on a Battletech map, it probably takes a lot less time than 60 seconds for it to cross that 360Km.