20 replies to this topic

[mr saxon]

I see quite a few threads that have remarks in them along the lines of 'Well we have this right now so why don't they'.

You have to remember the table top games were made a long time ago and their 'future' dates are very nearly our present. Take a peek at this link here http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Timeline to see that we should already have a nice space station in orbit that has been upgraded a few times and such.

The point of this post is to make it very clear that mechs would be 100% ineffective in our current level of warfare. We can send large payloads of explosives over the distance of -miles- guided by orbital targeting systems accurate enough to fly through windows of buildings to make sure they explode on the inside of them instead of detonating on the outside. Mech speeds are awesome at 100kph but this is only about 60mph... I drive to work faster than that and even our heavy bomber airplanes fly faster than that... and higher.. Jump jets will not get you to 10,000 feet of elevation.

Comparing what we should be able to do in MWO based on what we can do today is something we should not do or that world breaks down. Its why the FPS versions of the Mechwarrior games all have that 1 or 2 configurations that you alpha strike with to just blow out a torso/leg on sight of a mech.

I really hope the FPS elements are dummbed down to where you are targeting a mech, Not the head or leg or whatever, but the mech itself.. because that is the basis for mech combat.. You do not have the accuracy with the weapons that we have achieved in reality.

[Aaron DeChavilier]

absolutely agree, Battletech is not the real world or a deviation of it; it is an alternate universe that exists for the sole purpose of allowing giant robots to slug it out in a very entertaining way; love watching people try and understand this very important concept. no one questions plausibleness in star wars, so why battletech?

[Nebfer]

Note: A M1A2 Abrams main battle tank has a rated off road speed of 30 mph (48kph), and a on road speed of 42 mph (~68kph)
This translates into a 3/5 vehicle of 65 tons (B-tech ground vehicles (sans mechs) do get a +1 movement for road travel). This basically means that an Abrams and most of the current MBTs have roughly the same speed as most assault mechs. Never mind units like the Locust, which easily reach speeds of 130kph (or 302kph with the 6M model).

And yes the Abrams can disable it's governor and travel on smooth roads at speeds above 70 mph, but it's not good for that tank nor it's crew. Tough B-tech vehicles have a number of options of increasing it's speed out side of components.
Though talking about civilian car speeds when talking about military vehicle speeds is not exactly the best comparison...

Aerospace fighters can fly their entire mission in side of an atmosphere at multiple machs and a number can fly all the way around the world with out refueling (all one needs is 14 tons of fuel, though atmospheric fighters can do this with about 4 tons). They are also SSTO capable units (reach orbit with out staging) and them fly to the moon in about six hours.

Battletech armor can take hits from hypersonic Heavy Gauss Rifle slugs (which mass 250 kilograms (550 pounds), and see the Novel End Game) and not get penetrated. No real world ground vehicle can take that kind of hit and remain in operation (it's the same KE as a 16 inch naval shell at point blank). Tough strangely it can fail to low velocity impacts.. On the other had some Aerospace fighters can survive ramming at 3km/s...

Theirs even conflicting issues on ranges, current rules do allow for attacking targets out to the firing units line of sight (thats 12+ kilometers), out side that Anti aircraft shooting allows for a mech to engage targets that are some 2 kilometers away (a bit odd if you think a Particle cannon only has a range of some 540 meters). Never mind the fact that the rules never take the targets elevation into account (so it's perfectly legal to attack a unit with a small laser even though the unit is on a elevation of 200 (thats 1.2km by the way)). In space a battlemech has a effective range of between nine and 18 kilometers (depending on the where the units are in it's hex). And the RPG has infantry weapons that range into the kilometers....

An interesting thing about Crippen station (that space station you mentioned) it has a crew of 2,000, and was built in about 15 years, the ISS is about 450 tons and has a crew of about six, so we are looking an orbital lift capability of easily 50 times what we are capable of doing (a side note the B-tech US navy built more Sea Wolf Class subs than we did).

Edited by nebfer, 03 November 2011 - 11:32 AM.

[TheRulesLawyer]

Not to mention that mechs in general are a bad idea. The ground pressure they would generate while running would cause severe mobility problems on anything but very solid ground. That number of joints and high target profile with mostly unsloped armor would be relatively easily penetrated. Might as well just accept that battletech doesn't use real world physics or logic and get on with it.

[VYCanis]

"but battletech is not realistic!"

oh but it can be! Thats why i like people like Nebfer and Cray, they can extrapolate from battletech something close to believable. Maybe not practical, but with the right fudging and a little squinting, believable.

I'd rather have Nebfer's realism based take on battletech that seems to ground it, than others that seem to want to simulate all the quirks of a dice based system in real time, rather than the setting and technology those dice are trying to abstractedly represent.

Not saying the TT system is bad, or should be thrown out. but making mechs suck in real time just because the TT has a high wiff factor and absurdly short ranges doesn't mean that makes for the best simulation.

Edited by VYCanis, 03 November 2011 - 11:45 AM.

[Tsen Shang]

Oh, it's this thread again.

[zudukai]

bipods, unlikely, quad's, hexa's and octo's are feasible, however the size must be around the same as a tank simply for the body, housing all the motors actuators or hydraulics and other needed items (like weapons) it can be done however a leg that is loadbarring at the time of an impact will be damaged severely simply from the K.E. of impact, however with more then four legs it can still function without that appendage if it were to use another leg in it's stead.

they are usefull because rocks and steeper inclines can be traversed, war torn battlefields can be moved across, (fallen building e.t.c.) an embankment can easily be walked around or over, choke points will be alot less likely to happen to a mech, they would be excellent pop shooters, being able to push themselves high over hills or other obstacles and the like, surprising the enemy.

IRL bipods could be used on limited basis if constructed properly, (think C&C artillery and chromehounds<-{ish}) speed could be improved with the right design and pattern of motion. (high pressure hydrolics, magnetic assisted actuators, e.t.c.)

[dh crow]

Realistic combat is dull.

Edited by dh crow, 03 November 2011 - 12:41 PM.

[Lori Black Widow Carlyle]

no one questions plausibleness in star wars, so why battletech?

I definitely need to remember that one

@OP: Altogether for me it goes like: the more realistic it tastes (looks and feels) like, the better, because it gets you more into the BT fantasy world. Eyecandy AND physics sim do a good job here. It totaly makes me "believe", if it's even interactive. BUT the gameplay still needs to be and stay fun! It's quite hard to define fun though. That's individual I guess.

[Perfecto Oviedo]

Dude, IRL tech got nothing on noteputers!

[Solkar]

Ok... not complete YET, and this doesn't have weapons systems...

BUT

Go check out

http://www.facebook....6174095?sk=wall

(or just search facebook for "mechanized" and they are the first hit, called MPS Incorporated.

Their homepage is

www.mechaPS.com

(but it is offline today for some reason)

They are building a real, full sized, really functioning mech.

look, discuss, enjoy!

[Nebfer]

TheRulesLawyer, on 03 November 2011 - 11:41 AM, said:

Not to mention that mechs in general are a bad idea. The ground pressure they would generate while running would cause severe mobility problems on anything but very solid ground. That number of joints and high target profile with mostly unsloped armor would be relatively easily penetrated. Might as well just accept that battletech doesn't use real world physics or logic and get on with it.

This is largely true, however aside from the fact that battletech ignores the physics of real life mechs, battletech dose try to follow real life physics as much as possible, though their are simplifications along the way. Though their are a few other areas where their is significant bending (though thermodynamics kinda gets broken with large space craft engines and their efficiencies... I.e. 39.5 tons of hydrogen (regular) to accelerate a 2.5 million ton ship at 9.8m/s per day).

Even so their is a vast amount of data you can get by calculating from known data points. For example I can calculate the following data for an Aerospace fighter using the below stats
Accelration
Size of hex
length of turn
fuel use

Using thoughs one can get the following data
Range (both atmospheric and space)
Atmospheric speeds and space velocity's
Engine ISP
Engine Thrust
endurance
over all thrust
power generation of the engine

This is what I can get from looking at the rules and record sheets for an ASF

Name: CNT-1D Centurion
Date in service: ~2400
Operator: House Davion / Every one
Empty Weight: 25 tons
Mass: 30 tons
Max Take off weight: 36 tons
Power plant: Pitban 240 Fusion rated at 2,206.5kN (496,040 lbf)
Acceleration: 7.5G (10/15)
Climb Rate: 1500m/s
Service Celing: Unlimited
Max Low altitude speed (0-17km): 3,600 kph -Mach 3.39
Max High altitude speed (+90km): 16,200 kph -Mach 16.42
Fuel load: 5 tons +3 tons external
Max Ferry Range: 14,400km (22,850km with external fuel)
Max Interplanetary/Space range: 1,806,300km
Endurance: 40 to 400min (70 to 640min with external fuel)
Armor mass: 7.5 tons standard
External ordnance: 6 tons
Radar Range: 10,000km (at lest in space)
Weapons: 3x Maxell Medium Lasers
 

Notes the ISP is something like 72,000

[IS Wolf]

Let's phrase it like this, we're probably closer to having combat ready Spartan Battle Armour, than we are to having battle ready Battlemechs.

[mr saxon]

Nebfer, on 03 November 2011 - 11:30 AM, said:

{SNIP}

Battletech armor can take hits from hypersonic Heavy Gauss Rifle slugs (which mass 250 kilograms (550 pounds), and see the Novel End Game) and not get penetrated. No real world ground vehicle can take that kind of hit and remain in operation (it's the same KE as a 16 inch naval shell at point blank). Tough strangely it can fail to low velocity impacts.. On the other had some Aerospace fighters can survive ramming at 3km/s...

{SNIP}

Battlemech's have one weakness, their cockpits. I was merely trying to point out that our modern day weapons are accurate enough to be launched from miles beyond the range of any mech (either from air land or sea) and are accurate enough to fly through a 2x3 foot window.. more than accurate enough to take out the cockpit on any mech moving at such speeds on land. Do not get me wrong, I love Battletech.. I am just annoyed at people who do not understand the rules of the world are there to provide a challenge.. Its a tactical simulation, not an FPS.

VYCanis, on 03 November 2011 - 11:44 AM, said:

{SNIP}
Not saying the TT system is bad, or should be thrown out. but making mechs suck in real time just because the TT has a high wiff factor and absurdly short ranges doesn't mean that makes for the best simulation.

All I am trying to get at is to not apply real world technology to the tech of the BTUniverse. The dice and the hit location calculations are there to simulate alot of things that we outright remove from the video game versions. All I would like is some form of compensation. If we give mechs pin point accuracy.. Well who would want to ever pilot one knowing that the weakest armored part of the mech is where you sit and its just as easy to hit it and not the areas where all the armor is located? If we give players that level of accuracy, which I am all for mind you, then we need to compensate some how to try and maintain the fun in the game so it does not come down (when an even match on all factors) simply to who shot first.

Lori Black Widow Carlyle, on 03 November 2011 - 12:44 PM, said:

{SNIP}

@OP: Altogether for me it goes like: the more realistic it tastes (looks and feels) like, the better, because it gets you more into the BT fantasy world. Eyecandy AND physics sim do a good job here. It totaly makes me "believe", if it's even interactive. BUT the gameplay still needs to be and stay fun! It's quite hard to define fun though. That's individual I guess.

Very much agree. I want the world to look like the video they released saying it was all game play. Looked awesome. I just really hope the game play is fun and goes back to being more strategy.. WHile I prefer the Mechwarrior games over the Mech Command games, the Mech Commander do focus more on the tactical aspects of the BTUniverse that are usually just left out of the MechWarrior games all together.. I am just hoping they make a return in some manner.

All of the costs associated with Mechs in the battle tech universe do not fit in a video game.. especially when that game is taken from single player to multi player like this. I mean.. if your mech blows and you dont eject you should be dead, no more MWO for you.. Some how I can not see that happening ... If you live you have to get a new mech, Could take a very long time so no MWO for you for a month while your new mech is processed and delivered? Yeah, do not see that happening either. (Hell, if that is how they are doing it, I will not be playing much.. I will make a Mech Museum where I just look at my awesome battle mech but do not want to get it scratched so ill just keep it in the hangar )

I guess at the end of the day I am asking people to actually look a the table top game as to why it was a challenge and therefore fun. Then try and translate that into a live video game but maintain the balance and challenge within that environment as well. Not just 'well we can do this in real life so we should be able to do it in the game' because at the end of the day, too much reality in the BTUniverse is going to ruin it... which is what I hope I am getting across here.

I want a fun enjoyable game with a persistent feel to it... not a real life combat simulator that just happens to have huge walking tanks in it.

[PewPew]

mr.saxon, on 03 November 2011 - 10:15 AM, said:

The point of this post is to make it very clear that mechs would be 100% ineffective in our current level of warfare.

This is something that bothers me to no end until I rationalize it. I figure that the first mechs were built as sort of super weapons. A platform for very big guns, like a tank, but had a bit more agility, the ability to traverse certain terrains, and the ability to create a firing angle behind cover.

Eventually, production capabilities skyrocketed and armies began to field more and more of these mechs. Because of their versatility as moving artillery and city assault platforms, mechs could play the roles of both the tank and a new role, which was one of an armored juggernaut which could function much better than a tank in a city. Soon enough, mechs were caught in engagements with other mechs. Because this was bound to happen, mechs were developed to be able to handle mech vs. mech engagements, and the mech eventually became the standard of war.

In a way, the evolution of the role of the mech is very similar to that of the modern tank. At first, tanks were armored vehicles created to traverse open land between trenches. Now, they have evolved into mobile cannons with the capability of engaging other armored vehicles.

Hell, I even rationalized the circle strafing derpfest that is close combat mech fighting. With this, I create an analogy to modern infantry fighting. Infantry engagements now are at very long ranges. At around 300 meters, a lot of combat is just putting rounds towards your enemy and hoping they hit until you can call for reinforcements or fire support. But of course, close combat engagements were bound to happen. While the first engagements probably resulted in both sides just shooting a lot in a panic, out of this evolved CQB, or the practice of close quarters battle. With this came strategies like room clearing, and weapons like the flash bang and high rate-of-fire submachineguns. If you think about it, room clearing is still a crude, high risk method of fighting. Much like in the way running in circles firing your lasers is crude and risky...

The things I do to enjoy giant robots shooting each other.

[FlystreesVagann]

dh crow, on 03 November 2011 - 12:40 PM, said:

Realistic combat is dull.

In your opinon x)

[PewPew]

FlystreesVagann, on 07 November 2011 - 12:24 PM, said:

In your opinon x)

Have you experienced combat? I think most people would describe it as physiologically arousing, but still fairly dull.

[Lightfoot]

They still have tanks, but a 'mech would crush a tank. You can counter a tank or a 'mech, but that doesn't make them obsolete. Logically, the reason you have a walking tank is to mount beam and laser weapons to extend the line of sight/range beyond what a ground level beam weapon could achieve. 'Mechs fill the same role as tanks, but as a sort of super-tank.

Of course it's all sci-fi fantasy, but how do you think they will deploy large lasers and PPC beam-fire weapons? Tanks are too low to the ground to clear obstacles and hills. Low orbit is too far away. They are too heavy for aircraft to make much use of them. A tank on legs offers the most logical platform.

[Cake Bandit]

So am I right in thinking that this thread is essentially saying "When we say it should work this way, we're talking about game feel and being in setting. Leave your battlefields and Modern Warfares at home, kiddos, this is the FUTURE, and the FUTURE is GIANT ILLOGICAL ROBOTS!"

[Wicced]

Any giant armored vehicle with knees is a bad idea in a realistic combat scenario. This does not keep it from being the coolest thing known to mankind.