518 replies to this topic

[Curon Hifor]

pursang, on 15 April 2012 - 02:16 AM, said:

LordDeathStrike, if I didn't know better I'd think you where purposefully leading people here astray. Almost every post you seem to make concerning the lore and canon of this game is partially wrong - at best. For someone who proffesses to know a lot about BT/MW you seem to know quite little about it.



http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Quad_%27Mech

There are in fact, quite a few quad BattleMechs in existance.

Hell yeah! Give me a QUAD!!

[Skylarr]

As of 3049 The Inner Sphere only has access to 2 Quads. You will not see any others for a couple more years.

Edited by Skylarr, 16 April 2012 - 10:02 AM.

[MechRaccoon]

To be honest, I prefer biped mechs, but quads would bring something new to the table. It would also mean that the devs are taking an idea from Age of Destruction, which also was the birthplace of some new ideas, like actually being able to use infantry and tanks. (Wait, did Living legends come first?)


Btw, GOLIATH LOOKS LIKE AT-AT!

Edited by MechRaccoon, 16 April 2012 - 10:07 AM.

[El Loco]

Would I want to see quads in game? Yes, of course... they're an interesting feature of BT. Would I want to pilot a quad? Hell no, I prefer the bipedal 'Mech designs, and haven't found a single quad that suits my style.

[Stormeris]

El Loco, on 16 April 2012 - 10:13 AM, said:

Would I want to see quads in game? Yes, of course... they're an interesting feature of BT. Would I want to pilot a quad? Hell no, I prefer the bipedal 'Mech designs, and haven't found a single quad that suits my style.

add one more option for people like El loco: "Id like quads to be in game, but i woudlnt pilot one

[William Petersen]

LordDeathStrike, on 16 April 2012 - 03:49 AM, said:

"The 'Mech was originally intended as a stable weapons platform but as the model came into service it was relegated to an infantry support role. The design itself was also shunned by most MechWarriors due to the rough ride of the four-legged gait." infantry support walking tank, shunned by mechwarriors, read the damn sarnas before posting!

"The Goliath is armed with what would be considered a paltry armament for a 'Mech of its size" the bigger brother is even more lame. face it, all the good designs are biped, theres a reason mechwarriors hate quads.

Still ignoring every point you feel you can not discredit, I see.

I did read, thank you. I also find it humorous you tell me to read, but did not realize CHH and CIH were Crusader Clans (another counter-point you conveniently ignore). Perhaps you shoule 'practice what you preach' as it were.

"Walking tank"? That kinda sounds like how BattleMechs are principally describe in every review I've ever read for BattleTech Ever. "Shunned by MechWarriors" does not really mean much to me. Kind of like how the DreamCast was 'shunned by gamers'. It was a fine system, it just was not popular. Popularity does not speak to quality (and doesn't even necessariuly speak to [monetary] success or failure in a non-capitalist market like what you find in clan militaries).

Furthermore, their reason for 'shunning' the design is laughable. Because it was a "rough ride"? Hah! This is not a spa. It is the military. You use what hardware you have/are given. I suspect the 'shunning' is directly related to the reason behind 'relegating to infantry support'. If you could reduce the speed to 5/8 and give the sucker JJs, there would very little reason to ever take a Panther over it.

The SCP-1N is an excellent design, canon comfort complaints aside. I use it with glee from time to time in the TT. It is a quad. Your claim is thus refuted.

Lastly, I would like to point out that the ASN-21 has a pretty pethetic armament for its tonnage, too. It is the same problem. The GOL-1H and the ASN-21 are both a bit faster than others in their weight class. They pay for that speed with weapons payload. Welcome to Tech 1.

I will be happy to refute or affirm your contention about relative armour values as soon as I am able to access a computer capable of opening a MechLab program. Until then to say I am "skeptical" is an understatement.





EDIT: It's amusing how wrong you are and continue to be. Contrary to what you said, a Quad can mount *more* armour than a biped of equal tonnage.

EX: SCP compared to CN9. Both are 55 tons.

The maximum armour a 55 ton Quad can mount is 201 (200 is the efficient maximum for standard armour, as for that last point you have to pay a half ton and waste 7 points of armour because you cannot allocate them).

The maximum armour a 55 ton Biped can mount is 169 (168 is the efficient maximum for standard armour, as for that last point you have to pay a half ton and waste 7 points of armour because you cannot allocate them).

The math I've learned since preschool tolls me 200 (for the quad) > 168 (for the Biped).

The back legs of a Quad will be 2-points better-armoured than the legs of a Biped. The front legs will be 10-points better armoured than the arms. And the all torsos both front and back are 1-point better armoured than the Biped (RCT is 2 points better).

Yes, a Quad lacks critical space, so it doesn't benefit as much (at all? =P) from Endo Steel, Ferro Fibrous, or Double Heat Sinks (especially the IS versions). It cannot carry as big of a weapons loadout as a Biped, however, it has its own advantages, such as strafing movement (I think; never could figure out how to make it work in MegaMek) which more directly makes up for the lack of torso twist. It can sustain the loss of one (or two?) leg(s?) with little to no penalty (I lack my rules book at the moment, even though I can open a SSW). uads also never fail (never even have to roll) PSRs if all 4 legs are intact. It'll never skid, it'll never get knocked down to damage, it can freely go prone and erect itself.

They're not as versatile as Bipeds, I'll admit that freely. However, quads are a very special tool and they do have a place on the battlefield. I dearly hope they are implemented at some point. in the future. I've been wanting to hop in one since MW2, 'rough ride' or not.

Edited by William Petersen, 16 April 2012 - 11:48 AM.

[Colorfinger]

I wouldn't pilot one but they are part of the lore so I want them in the game.

[Stormeris]

I lift my hat off, for you Wiliam Petersen even though....youre a pony




Nah im just kidding, i watched a couple of MLP episodes theyre not that bad...i guess, lol'd couple of times

[JadeTimberwolf]

Well I hate picking up after so many intervening posts or after a thread merger but I need to say this, LordDeathStrike, what exactly did you mean by "non canon non bipedal mechs"? as far as I know the 3 quad mechs that I have mentioned as existing, 2 of which would have been in limited production the third being lostech but still existing are canon and are IS not Clan. I do also believe that in my postings I was trying to present the quads as a support role mech turret or no turret.

Speaking of turrets, I have noticed some people making the suggestion of adding them, now I am more of a tabletop battletech player then a video gamer these days so I use mostly tabletop terminology, Mech Turrets are introduced in ruleset 3 if memory serves and while no date is set to the ruleset but some of the items that show up in that ruleset do not start appearing until after 3060 or later.

Now I am not completely up on my canon, I know a good amount of lore but not all lore is canon what I do have more knowlege of over lore and canon is tabletop rules, I have been designing mechs for tabletop play as well as mech varient for tabletop play for years and I can tell you this, the difference between a biped and a quad in regards to rules is minimal and I don't see them being too difficult to implement, all they would need to do in my opinion is look at mechwarrior 2 in example since that is the only one of the video games I know for a fact included a quad, namely the Tarantula. Yet these are just my opinions and please don't take them as hard fact.

[Codius Dakanius]

IF they would have this 'mech i would pilot it.... A LOT!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Thunder_Fox

[The unnamed one]

JadeTimberwolf, on 15 April 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

I am both a Battletech(Tabletop Stragety) and Mechwarrior(PCgame & TabletopRPG) vet and I can say that Quads are cannonical to both, BTW ever play Mechwarrior 2? Guess what is in that game, a Quad.namely the Tarantula. Also Melee/hand held weapons are cannonical and they are IS designed weapons so chances are we will see them, don't like them but that is because of old gaming alliances within the Battletech universe.

The one thing I would love to see them incorperate is an option for us to design our own mechs, doubt it will happen to be honest but would be nice.

yes I was thinking of a 100+ ton quad mech that has two long toms and some med lasers for defence. Also and a lot of armor. downside of it is that is could be really slow.

Edited by The unnamed one, 16 April 2012 - 11:24 AM.

[JadeTimberwolf]

The unnamed one, on 16 April 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

yes I was thinking of a 100+ ton quad mech that has two long tome and some med lasers for defence. Also and a lot of armor. downside of it is that is could be really slow.

2 major flaws to that idea, first no Battlemech, Biped or Quad, are over 100 tons, second you could never fit 2 artillery weapons of any name on a quad nor could they fit 1 longtom, not enough crit slots.

[The unnamed one]

JadeTimberwolf, on 16 April 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

2 major flaws to that idea, first no Battlemech, Biped or Quad, are over 100 tons, second you could never fit 2 artillery weapons of any name on a quad nor could they fit 1 longtom, not enough crit slots.

Ares mech 125-135 ton mech and Long tom cannon

Edited by The unnamed one, 16 April 2012 - 11:28 AM.

[JadeTimberwolf]

That my friend is neither a Biped nor a Quad, also it is an abomination to the names Battletech and Mechwarrior. Here is a challenge for you, find a mech that exists in either Mechwarrior video games or the Battletech Tabletop systems that is over 100 tons

[Kaemon]

I'm indifferent about quads, they would give us something different to look at (along with the chicken walkers) which is about the most support I can muster for them.

And when they talk about 'uncomfortable gait' they probably mean pilots would sustain injuries with prolonged piloting, remember these are mech warriors, not teenage girls, they take a hell of a lot of abuse.

If you add quads, I'd argue to add tanks, if you add tanks, I'd argue to add LAMs, if you add LAMs, I'd argue to include pilot-able drop ships and flight assets.

You're really stepping on MW:LL's toes at that point, it would be nice to not squeeze them out of the box totally.

For an MVP release, you have to draw the line somewhere, it appears they drew it here.

Although imagine the Chaos if they release an Unseen quad mech for one of the surprise mech release Wednesdays?

Hilarious.

[verybad]

Pretty certain thay won't be in. At least for the start. There are a lot of technical problems with animating quad mechs on non level terrain. They can be overcome, but it's not easy, and takes a lot fo resources. In addition, maps that might work for bipeds might have problems for quads (eg close buildings making turns not work right.

I don't have anything against quads, but I think that the bennefits of putting them in are kind of outweighed by the amount of work.

In addition, quads shoudl be signifigantly shorter by tonnage, as their torso is a more horizontal unit. *shrugs*

As mentioned before by other people. Tanks might be a better thing to add first.

Edited by verybad, 16 April 2012 - 11:42 AM.

[Motionless]

stormeris, on 16 April 2012 - 10:16 AM, said:

add one more option for people like El loco: "Id like quads to be in game, but i woudlnt pilot one

OP probably made it with loaded answers to be funny. Kinda like

Would you like quads in MWO?

 
1) yes, my PHD in battletech leads me to believe this is an excellent addition to the game
2) no, it interferes with cocaine addiction

[UncleKulikov]

LordDeathStrike, on 15 April 2012 - 02:05 AM, said:

go hit up armored core 5, its got biped triped quads treads hovers, you name it.

mechwarriors pilot bipeds exclusively.

The scorpion would like a word with you.

[William Petersen]

verybad, on 16 April 2012 - 11:41 AM, said:

As mentioned before by other people. Tanks might be a better thing to add first.

I can't imagine wanting to drive a tank. They're so, so easy to immmobilize.

Kaemon, on 16 April 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

Although imagine the Chaos if they release an Unseen quad mech for one of the surprise mech release Wednesdays?

Hilarious.

Oh, I can just imagine the rage. XD

[verybad]

Yeah, none of the Quad unseens are nearly as popular as mechs like the Warhammer and Marauder. A Goliath or Scorpion release would be filled with requests for those two mechs more than kudos for the quad.