Ok. Trundle on, brave tank! Trundle on!

Excuse my ignorance. I've never played BT and I'll probably never get the chance too. Are tanks useful in that game? I mean its a game about FUCKHUGE mechs...

>>6571377
They are very useful for filling out your ranks. They are cheap and usually loaded with heavy weapons.

>>6571399

You know your game is epic when FUCKING TANKS are the things you use to fill your ranks.

>>6571377
Useful, yes.
Thats about really. They are a support element rather than the key players, and are handy in that role, by bringing cheep but somewhat vulnerable mech-equivalent firepower at low cost.

The Po here for instance is basically a bunch of mobile armour with an AC10 and a couple of MGs. It is pretty much the most average tank you could get. but used well and it provides either a good distraction or good ranged support (can't ignore that main gun for long as its enough firepower to put holes in annoying places with a couple of good shots).

Man... I can't wait 'till I get a chance to field a Rotunda...

I mean, holy crap, that '89 honda civic is totally going to rape your shit.

>>6571469
This.
As someone who routinely fields a lance of Po tanks, they are good to distract and act as something of an annoying speed bump.

...or when they are ignored, act as treaded rape against anything you send them at.

They just can't stand up properly against a mech... pun sorta intended.

Other tanks however can be a little more annoying. The Clan Epona has a deserved reputation as holding its own.

The Alacorn MkVI can riddle even an assault mech with holes (pic, 3 gauss- yikes!).

But neither has the stamina of a mech proper, or the ability to leave the field of battle after being mauled. Which is a flaw all vehicles have. Sooner or later, under fire, every vehicle will grind it's motive systems to a stop.

>>6571585
Alacorn fluff:

An XL fusion engine makes the Alacorn fast enough to keep up with most assault 'Mechs, and saves enough weight to mount substantial weapons systems and armor. Three Gauss rifles, mounted on a rotary turret that provides the tank with a full 360-degree firing arc, give the Alacorn devastative firepower. Five tons of Gauss ammunition let the Alacorn stay in combat for a long time. Thirteen tons of armor cover the Alacorn's chassis, providing the tank with excellent armor protection. The front of the Alacorn alone is protected by three tons of armor, making the Alacorn more heavily armored than Rommel and Von Luckner tanks.

>>6571624
Such speed and armor protection does not come without a price, however. The suspension system suffers considerable stress when 95 tons of charging tank makes a 90-degree turn at 54 kph. To keep the vehicle working properly, tank crews must constantly check the track tension. If the track is too loose, the tank will shear its treads off on the first hard turn. If it is too tight, the road wheels and other suspension systems are liable to be damaged or destroyed.
Adjusting track tension is relatively easy. The crew runs a taut string from the idler wheel in the front to the top of the drive sprocket. The tread hangs in a shallow arc under the string. If the lowest point of the arc is between 40 and 65 millimeters under the string, then the track is properly adjusted.
Official gauges and rulers were issued to Alacorn crews to help them make these measurements, but troopers frequently misplaced them in the field. The tank crews then came up with an ingenious expedient, using the popular Pharaoh beer produced by a Federated Suns brewing company. Pharaoh beer is packaged in an unusual container shaped like a truncated pyramid, exactly 40 millimeters wide at the top and 65 millimeters wide at the base. Most Alacorn crews used these widely available cans as gauges to measure that critical distance when checking track tension. Because the internal pressure caused by the beverage inside the container slightly distorted its shape, however, only a freshly emptied Pharaoh could be used to make the proper adjustments. Not Surprisingly, Alacorn tank crews perform track maintenance frequently and thoroughly.


Mmmm.... beer.

>>6571634
Awesome bit of fluff that. If anything it sounds like its inspired by something form real life, as its got a nice edge of believability to it.

>>6571634

That's just fantastic

>>6571377
With new rules, most tanks are MUCH bigger threats (infernos aren't an auto-kill any more). For the cost of a lightish mech, you can get an assault tank hauling shit like gauss rifles and PPCs around.

Tanks can be real bastards. The Myrmidon and Po are good examples: enough firepower to be noticed, enough protection to keep in the fight, enough mobility to stick itself in; they're cheap, too.

Give the Savannah Master a look - it DEFINES death by a thousand cuts, and the things are dirt-cheap.

Demolishers and SRM carriers are incredible cunts in their home territory.

>>6571377
Yes. Tanks are best for support, but their cheap nature makes them good for using sheer numbers, too.

>>6572200

Battletech has some of the most hilarious fluff of any wargame.

Pic related; it's the logo of a mercenary unit that, among other things, has their own brand of beer and has retrofitted a group of APCs and mobile HQs into "hot boxes" - fucking party vans - that follow them around out in the field so personnel can get tore up in any weather.

I mean, for fuck's sake, Greenberg's Godzillas dress their 'mechs up like monsters and trash 1:1 scale sets for movies when they're not doing traditional merc work. This game is a total hoot.

>>6573584
There was some scribblefagottry of those hotboxes back in the day...

I think that, ironically enough, the artist was drunk at the time, too.

>>6573584
It's the little things in Battletech that make it special. Such as Lt Malcolm Reynolds being the Pirate Captain of a Mercenary group. And his 'mech? A firefly.

>>6573584
This is hilarious and awesome. Please tell me that there is more fluff like this out there for Btech.

Hello, I'm still deadly after all these years. A little bit of everything, ready to ruin your opponent's day.

>>6573584
Hey...war is hell...

>>6573634
Is this legit fluff?

Fuck yeah.

>>6573812

>>6573634

I never noticed that. What unit?

>>6573794

The Cavaliers are an elite Davion unit- and Doctor Banzai is one of the chief researchers for the NAIS during the 3rd Succession War, on New Avalon.

His lab includes a watermelon experiment.

>>6573848
Read TRO 3050 Upgrade, the Notable Pilots section for the Firefly 'mech.

>>6573911

...That's Lt. JAMES Reynolds.

>>6573980
Lies, he only tells people his name is James.

>>6573794

Read any TRO or fluff supplement. Hell, read ANY supplement. If a book isn't a gold mine in terms of that stuff, it's got little hidden treats that are all the better for actually having to find them.

It's a little less funny and more FUCK YEAR, but the fluff for the PPC is some seriously amazing shit. The weapon was originally developed for use on space battleships and it took nearly a century to successfully miniaturize it enough to put on 'mechs and tanks.

>>6573794
Battletech runneth over with ridiculous references and goofy fun stuff. Snord's Irregulars are a merc group...that concerns itself with hunting art pieces. Really.

>>6575258
The Green Machine has an XO who is drunk almost all the time. The "Clean Kill" Mercenary group has one of the largest artillery units of any mercenary command... The list goes on.

GRIM DETERMINATION.

Being both grim and determined, they have a tortoise with an SRM pack for a logo.

don't forget LRM carriers. They're ideal for deploying Thunder minefields on the fly.

The Hetzer wheeled assault gun is brutal in city fighting (essentially an 18-wheeler with an AC-20 (huge-ass autocannon) mounted on it.

>>6575258
Do they really play Elvis at max volume on all radio frequencies during combat or was I lied to?

>>6579462
That looks like it could be a feasible mech design.

>I mean, for fuck's sake, Greenberg's Godzillas dress their 'mechs up like monsters and trash 1:1 scale sets for movies when they're not doing traditional merc work. This game is a total hoot.

GAMERA! Friend of all Children!

>>6580564

Sure, I'll take a stab at it:


30-ton IS quad 'mech.

Standard internal structure (3 tons) and engine (5.5 tons).

Standard control systems (2-ton gyro, 3 tons of cockpit, life support & sensors).

Amor factor: 92 (hardened) / 11.5 tons

Weapons: (total tonnage: 5, total heat: 9)
1 medium laser (head)
1 SRM2 (right torso)
1 SRM2 (center torso)
1 SRM2 (left torso)
1 ton SRM ammo (50 shots - left torso)

Heat sinks: 10 standard (6 in engine)
1 heat sink right torso
1 heat sink left torso
1 heat sink right rear leg
1 heat sink left rear leg

Internal structure locations:
head 3
center torso 10
left/right torso 7
right front leg/left front leg 7
right rear leg/left rear leg 7

Armor locations:
head 9
center torso 13
center torso rear 4
right/left torso 8
right/left torso rear 3
right front leg/left front leg 11
right rear leg/left rear leg 11

Walk MP 5/Run MP 7 (run reduced by 1 by hardened armor)

Cost: 2,062,190 C-bills

Battle value: 688

Sweet, a Battletech thread. I've been wanting to ask: anyone knows if there is such thing as RAC/10 or RAC/20?

Even ultra autocannon 20 falls into the WHEN A BIG FUCKING GUN ISNT ENOUGH FOR YOU -category.

>>6580654

More on Greenberg's Godzillas, from the "Notable MechWarriors" section of the Bandersnatch entry in TRO 3055 (Upgrade):

MAJOR SIMON VERHOEVEN
As executive officer of Greenberg’s Godzillas, Simon Verhoeven has been as involved in the mercenary unit’s theatrical exploits as in battlefield operations. An expert in planning and execution of visual effects, Simon developed the system through which the regiment can quickly mock up its BattleMechs to resemble other models.

Though initially intended for filming battle sequences in the epic “The Thirteenth MechWarrior,” the Godzillas also use their unique abilities in combat. Deployed to free up DCMS line units for the drive against the Smoke Jaguars, the mercenaries were spread across five worlds. When bandits struck Salford in force, the two companies of mercenaries rigged their ’Mechs to look like Clan OmniMechs. Not wishing to tangle with what appeared to be an overwhelming force, the bandits retreated without a shot being exchanged.

Verhoeven’s favorite assignment was for a sci-fi monster holomovie in which his Bandersnatch (suitably costumed) trampled a scale model of the Imperial City on Luthien into rubble.

>>6580924

Not officially, although I think a couple of MechForce rags in the UK published unofficial stats for each weapon. These stats appear in HeavyMetal Pro, and even the RAC/10 is so ludicrously heavy, bulky and hot-running that you'd pretty much have to build a Clan 'mech (for as much weight and space-saving shortcuts as possible) from the ground up and then shove the weapon (an IS weapon) into it. Cool, but also doesn't make much sense in fluff or crunch.

>>6581005
Sort of reminds me of that real anti-tank plane that is pretty much a huge goddamn gatling gun that had a jet built around it.

>>6581024

I get it!

Seriously though, it's more comparable to building a gun so clunky that aliens have to land and give you the tech to make a vehicle advanced enough to carry the gun and still be an effective combat machine.

>>6572775
That pic's awesome. Are there many more similar shots of people playing what appears to be 28mm Battletech? Shit looks SO cash.

>>6581059
RAC/2, racks and racks of LRMS and bombs.

>>6581154

Exactly.

NOT a RAC/20.

>>6581220

>>6581024 here, I wasn't implying that it would be anywhere near RAC/20. Just a similar thing, as in along the lines of "Ok so we made this awesome gun but can't fit it anywhere. Let's strap a plane on the gun instead!" "GENIOUS"

You have to admit it would be hilarious to have a 100-ton mech that has more gun than mech in it.

I think the heaviest gun that can be mounted on a mech is a LongTom artillery piece. 30 tons and 40 crits (takes up most of the arm/torso crits on the mech)

>>6581293

The problem with a 'mech mounted long tom artillery piece (not a long tom cannon, and there is a difference) is that freeing up enough space to fit the thing in would leave you with a 100-ton monster that could barely move and had no secondary weapons because it was stuffed full of heat sinks to compensate. Of course, you wouldn't be able to fit enough heat sinks into the 'mech due to the huge critical slot needs of the long tom, so it would shut itself down or explode after one shot (and it would probably only have enough room for one or two tons of ammo at the most, or 4-8 shots).

Try a sniper artillery piece instead. Much more manageable (pic related).

>>6581275

Oh, of course. That's why the concept has been tried with weapons that actually exist in the rules.

>>6581220
That or two tons of Thunderbolt/5 ammo. That you can launch all at once. :D

Kicking ass and taking names.

>>6581477

ohai

INNER SPHERE BARBARIANS, YOU ARE NOW PRISONERS OF THE CLANS!

>>6581583

Get the fuck out.

>>6581583
>>6581593

This has been a history of the Clan Invasion in two posts, brought to you by /tg/

wtff

>>6581655
lol

>>6581416

Did someone say MISSILES, THOUSANDS OF THEM?

>>6582134
Prefectly summarizes the RL-10.

>>6582171

If you insist.

>>6582410
I am such a faggot for macross-style missle trails.

>>6582433

Battletech can definitely be the game for you, then.

>>6582410
I'm really glad they decided to beef up the Ptolemy's defences in S2.

Still upset there was no Trans-Am-Psycho-Ptolemy-Gattai-Gundam. . . .

>>6571585
>The Clan Epona has a deserved reputation as holding its own.

Ever put a 0/1 in an Epona Prime?

It's fucking hilarious.

>>6582433
Itano Circus? Did somebody say Itano Circus?

>>6582343

In this case, I aim (poorly) to please. ^^

Here, have a gift from /m/.

>>6582503

> 0/1 in an Epona Prime.

OH GOD

Itano Circus is a well-respected tactical maneuver in Battletech.

>>6582503
What's so great about the Epona? It's not particularly fast, it doesn't have much armor, and the weapons are just decent.

>>6582561
Also healthy amounts of Roboteching.

>>6582433

This is Battletech. We enjoy good old-fashioned Scott Bernarding people (Rocket launchers, MRM's), or just showering them with love and long/short range missile fire. Like this fellow. 60 missiles-to-target, every 10 seconds.

>>6582583
It's a 9/14 hover with 4 MPLs on a turret.

It can easily give itself a +4 mod to hitting it every turn, and those MPLs mean it's still got a good chance of hitting even though it moved 10+ hexes. It can easily outflank almost any mech in the game for rear shots, and even if it loses Int, it can usually just drive itself to safety.

And it's got decent armor all around, so even if you do hit it it can usually deal with it.

>>6582645

Illustrated here, my good man.

Itano Circus: Not just for heavies and assaults.

Harmony Gold, FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF!

You had to remind of Harmony Gold. Their cockblockery over a dead series is faggotry of the highest caliber. Even the furfags say that their behavior is going too far.

I really hope the shitty Tobey Maguire Robotech live action movie will be the trainwreck that finally kills Harmony Gold.

Pic related, it is me after my order of Valkerie model kits got cancel due Harmony Gold's dickery. They do not even sell the kits themselves and have said there is no money it. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

>>6582718
More like Suckamander.

>>6582736
Are those neckbeard rockets on that thing? If so you are the awesomest 'mech ever!

>>6582748

Would you prefer a catapult?

>>6582685

It's one of those designs that's quick, accurate, and quite capable of melting faces.

Like a lot of very-quick designs, it's what LBX cluster ammo, pulse lasers, and area-effect weapons are for. The only good news about hovercraft like that are the odds of hitting the motive systems (and slowing it up) are good on any given shot. Once it's slowed down enough, it's relatively easy meat.

>>6582768

Unfortunately, that's just the way the armor looks.

>>6582780
Mostly, yea, But given that you'll commonly see Eponas paired with Athenas, wasting time trying to slow them down is often a fatal mistake.

>>6582747
I'm going to need a source on that picture.

How to win on all city maps

1. Fill out roster with NOTHING but SRM carriers and SRM infantry
2. Throw in a lance of urbies for humor
3. win

My favourite tanks are the S series hovercraft. It's always worth bringing a lance of them.

>>6582807

Rio Yanagawa - Triangle

>>6582813
Why bother with the carriers?

And as I always have to say, urbies aren't a joke in city maps. They work very well there, especially in groups.

This is an Arctic Wolf. It carries 6 short-range missile racks, each firing six shots per salvo.

For secondary weaponry, it has two more SRM-4 racks. And a missile launcher that sticks a beacon to it's target. That attracts missiles to it from all of it's friends.

In short, it's all missiles, all the time.

>>6582888
Because even though the urbie pulls its own weight and them some in that environment, it's not a solid replacement for a heavy or an assault.

The carriers reasonably guarantee that anything they fire at will be limping away if they get a shot off.

>>6582935
No, but it's a cheap replacement.

I like to play games based on c-bills, personally. Really lets people see why certain mechs "suck".

>>6582798

At least Athenas are 1) slow and 2) have their main guns fixed forward. THOSE you can at least outmaneuver.

>>6582829

Saladin, Saracen, Scimitar- yep, the classics.

>>6582968
Yea, but a good player's going to mess with you. Because if you're trying to stay out of the way of the Athenas guns, then the Eponas are going to be getting those back shots, and if you're trying to deal with the Eponas, then the Athenas are going to get shots off.

>>6582813
This is easily defeated.

Take a couple Bane 4's and a Turkina plus two Donar VTOL's.

VTOL's fly up high enough to see the entire city. Bane's indirect fire their 16 LRM15's. Turkina provides perimeter defense.

>>6582813

Bonus points if one of the vehicles is a light SRM carrier that ramps into the cargo bay of an enemy dropships, does donuts while firing its SRM launchers wildly, then ramps back out as the whole ship goes up in a massive fireball.

Before anyone says anything, yes, this is actual Battletech fluff.

>>6583068
In the grimdark future of the Clan Wars, there are only drunk ass frat boys with giant robots

>>6583019

Ah, yes. The Bane/Kraken. When you absolutely, positively have to spam autocannon or missile fire, overnight.

>>6583068
I always thought the one about the Bulldog with a dropship kill, five Battlemech kill, 40 vehicle kills, and several hundred infantry killed all in a single shot was even better.

>>6583068
"Wild Bill" Knutson and "Psycho" Moll in their Striker.

>>6583138

Tell us the story!

>>6583138

Battletech is basically one big never-ending clusterfuck of "everything blows up everywhere forever and it's totally fucking awesome" when it comes to this sort of thing.

>>6583162

Yeah, that's the one. I actually run a Mechwarrior RPG campaign and ever since I showed them that text my players always look a little suspicious whenever a Striker shows up on the game board.

>>6583166

I don't know anything about this game but after reading this thread I want to learn! ;_;

Also, Macross missile massacre is how I play every game

EVERY GAME.

So I heard that there's a canon conspiracy theory that Hanse Davion is the actual father of Sun-Tzu Liao, which would confirm 2 things:

1.) Genius is hereditary.
2.) CRAZY IN THE HEAD, CRAZY IN BED

>>6583162

Another piece of hilarious Striker-related fluff:

“Gypsie Queen”

The “Gypsie Queen” is something of a legend within the Seventeenth Avalon Hussars RCT. For as long as anyone can remember, the Striker bearing this name has been a part of the Ninety-ninth Avalon Armored Regiment, but by all accounts it has been destroyed dozens of times over, in addition to being captured in battle on Matsuida and An Ting during the FedCom Civil War. Still, whenever the Ninetyninth masses, the beat-up Striker, with its signature hull art and the dent in its aft right quarter (made by, as legend has it, Kanrei Theodore Kurita when he kicked the tank with his Orion during the War of 3039), is there with the rest of its regiment. Regardless of the truth or falsity of the legends built up around it (it turns out the Seventeenth Hussars and Kurita were never on the same world in 3039), the Gypsie Queen is the mascot of sorts for both tankers and infantry in the RCT.

"The dent, sir? Uh... Theodore Kurita did it!"

>>6583318
So basically the Clans are grimdark because their mechs are huge and badass and grimdark

The Inner Sphere is hilarious because they have crappy mechs and vehicles but LOTS OF THEM so all sorts of drunken hijinks happen

>>6583297
Well, it works and it doesn't.

MMM requires some finesse to do well in Btech. It's not just point and shoot.

>>6583297

Go to the game's website. The quick-start rules are a free download.

Also, the introductory box set is decently cheap and has absolutely everything you need to play.

>>6583349
Not so much. The Clans marked a minor tone shift for Battletech, like when your PCs stop ATTACKING THE DARKNESS and instead decide to fight some goblins.

Of course, 80s cheese is literally what Battletech has for blood, and not even WizKiddies could do anything about that.

>>6583349
The clans are in no way grimdark.

And there's plenty of stories for the clanners too. Not all of them are funny, but lots of them give the clanners some depth.

I still like the one about the old clanner pilot who'd defended the rights to a mech some dozen times, and he finally died of an aneurysm during a fight with the Jags. The Jags were absolutely pissed that such a great pilot went such a terrible way, so they included him in their database, which is like "holy shit".

>>6583359
It also depends on your missiles. LRM MMS is perfectly possible, and even more dangerous if you're a Clanner. SRM spam is similarly possible. MRMs are really only viable on vehicles. Rocket Launchers can work on mechs, but are truly at home on vees, which ignore ballistic and missile heat and which can frequently spare weight for a ten-pack punch in the dick.

Why exactly are mechs > tanks?

It seems mechs should have better mobility in rough terrain but poorer stats overall, for the same tank size.

And what about cruise missiles in battletech? Do they exist?

>>6583399

Yes, cruise missiles are statted in the Tactical Operations supplement. They're ultre-long-range artillery weapons and do an almighty fuckload of damage.

As for tanks v. mechs, the maneuverability is pretty much the key advantage for 'mechs. Some tanks can't even enter some kinds of terrain for various reasons, while 'mechs basically scramble over just about every obstacle.

Also, at least by the fluff, 'mechs also have a psychological effect above and beyond just being big military vehicles.

>>6583399
Cruise missiles exist. They're called Arrow IV artillery missiles. Capitol ships also have cruise missiles.

Mechs are better than tanks by writer's fiat. Better internal structure, better mobility, very flexible. The main killer of vees used to be inferno missiles (totally broken), but is now motive system destruction (gay, but tolerable). Hovers got a nerf that results in them doing silly shit like sliding into shit and blowing up, but they used to be pretty broken-good. Even with a fusion engine, a vee cannot produce "surplus" heat: they must have the heat sinks to handle ALL waste heat. This makes carrying more than a handful of energy weapons inefficient. Vees don't use double heat sinks, either.

Mechs can also utilize jump jets.

>>6583399
In terms of game rules, it's several factors.

The movement is one thing. Mechs can go just about anywhere, a lot of vehicles can't.

Another is hit locations. Your vehicles is going to have 4 possible locations on the table, 5 if it's got a turret. A mech boasts 8. Plus, from the front arc, tanks only get 3(4) of those locations as possible hits, while mechs get all 8 again. This means it's far easier to wear the armor down on a tank, because the odds of hitting the same place over and over again are much higher.

Third is motive damage. Tanks can take damage to their motive system relatively easily, making critical hit rolls from normal damage. These hits can quickly slow a tank down, or worse, immobilize it, both or which are basically death sentences in Btech. For a mech, you have to punch through or use special weapons in order to achieve critical damage, they can't be hurt nearly as easily.

These rules were designed specifically to favor mechs, of course, and for people it bothers, there's rules in TacOps that bring tanks up to snuff. The problem with these rules is that they make tanks much better, but at no extra cost to BV(tanks being much cheaper pound for pound due to these weaknesses) which causes a major imbalance in the game.

>>6583432
Mmm cause it just seemed to me like tanks should be able to pack in more armor into a better combat shell, and just be better in a straight up fight all around.

What about spider tanks? Seems more reliable than 2 legged mechs, with even better mobility, a more stable weapons platform. Might need a bigger engine though.

>>6583441

Arrow IV systems aren't the same as cruise missile artillery. They're shorter-range and do less damage in exchange for being a smaller and easier-to-transport hardware package.

Fun fact: Aerospace fighters can carry Arrow IV missiles in their bomb racks.

>>6583361
There's no point though since nobody plays btech at the LGS

>>6583481

Those are called Quad 'mechs.

>>6583473

Google megamek.

>>6583473
"Spider tanks" are quad mechs, and suffer from a lack of space to stick guns. They're more stable firing platforms, however.

>>6583502

Quads can also scoot sideways without having to turn and can "hull down" to make themselves harder to hit behind cover.

Tanks however, have plenty of advantages, and ton for ton, tend to carry the same amount of firepower as mechs.

Tanks are not bad by any stretch though. You can expect a reasonable chance of winning running an all mechanized force, provided you know what you're doing, and there's a lot of things tanks can do well(in double blind, for example, tanks are much easier to hide, which makes them great for ambushes)

>>6583359

Well, it can be- but it's more fun if you've got help. There's a pile of different missile types in the game that fall under "hit opponent, go boom".

SRM's are the kind of barely-guided armor-smashing rockets you'd see a man-portable type using- sorta like hitting someone with a bunch of bazooka rockets. Aside from the HE type, they also come in Inferno (napalm), which is nice for BBQing lots of things and overheating that annoying 'Mech over yonder so it shuts down. A point-and-boom advanced version called Streak won't fire unless it's guaranteed to hit (though ECM can mess it up), but those only come in "make em boom" missiles.

MRM's are iron-sight types- point and shoot. Not too accurate, but a lot of them go downrange per shot relative to other missile types. Kurita (the big MRM fan) makes up for the inaccuracy by networking their targeting systems with something called a C3 system, which lets a nearer unit share targeting data for easier shots.

LRM's are indirect-fire, ballistic weapons. Lob em over hills, toss em huge distances. Not too much of a punch, but if you throw enough, it makes an impression. A common version are "Thunder" LRM's- missiles that deploy minefields instead.

Thunderbolts are big, single missiles that more closely resemble what we think of as "modern" missiles. Big punch, single location.

Arrow IV's are artillery. LOOOOONG distance, both in area-effect boom and laser-guided varieties.

Rocket launchers are just that. Lots of rockets. One shot. Not very accurate. But cheap and easy to carry. Disposable firepower, frequently packed in large numbers.

>>6583481
So try and get people into it. The startbox has enough shit for four people to play.

>>6583473
Quads suffer space issues because they don't get arms, so they have problems carrying weapons, but they're quite stable and can be used well. The big problem is that quad designs are rare, more than anything else.

>>6583530

The Clans have an ATM (advanced tactical) launcher that fires a super-LRM (ER), middle-road (standard) and super-SRM (HE) depending on ammo, lighter versions of SRM, LRM, Arrow IV, and Streaks- but no Thunderbolts or MRM's. Or Rocket Launchers. They turn their nose up at "crude" weapons.

Missile launchers often have other guidance boosters as launcher attachments- ArtemisIV for LRM/SRM to land more missiles on target, Apollo for MRM's (better chance to hit), NARC (a sticky pod that attracts enemy missiles), etc.

>>6583524
Biped mechs can hulldown too, they just have to make a piloting roll to stand up after.

>>6583162

I'm a sad puppy now. Because it seems that I'll be forced to play merc to get all the funny units I'd love to have.

>>6583498
Tanks have trouble with more than 1 elevation change at a time, while mechs can do 2 elevation changes at a time. That's probably the mech's greatest advantage.

>>6583471

>Another is hit locations.


This doesn't make any sense. A mech has to stand upright, while a tank is much smaller. Because of it's smaller profile, the tank should be harder to hit anyways. That is, if a mech has 8 places to hit, a tank should have 4 places to hit and 4 places to miss.

>Third is motive damage. Tanks can take damage to their motive system relatively easily, making critical hit rolls from normal damage. These hits can quickly slow a tank down, or worse, immobilize it, both or which are basically death sentences in Btech. For a mech, you have to punch through or use special weapons in order to achieve critical damage, they can't be hurt nearly as easily.

Mechs have legs, though. It's not like you can't armor tracks and give tanks superior suspension if that was required.

I mean it's just glaringly obvious to me that standing upright is a huge disadvantage because it makes you a gigantic target. Your surface area is fuckhuge too, so to get the same protection you need MUCH more armor than something like a box, or else you risk getting your legs blown off by weak weapons.

>The movement is one thing. Mechs can go just about anywhere, a lot of vehicles can't.

This is the only real advantage I see.

However, why not make your mechs 4 legged, since mobility is pretty much the only benifit. 2 legs won't really help you get down a steep mountainside.

Also, tanks should be capable of using jump jet type features as well to cross terrain, though they should of course not be able to jump as high or as fast or as far due to the worse suspension. However, they should be lighter than mechs due to the reduced need for armor, so a 50 ton tank should be able to do the job of a 70 ton mech, anyways.

>>6583578
No, it's the hit locations and the motive damage that really screw tanks.

>>6583553

By the fluff quads also got a chilly reception mostly due to the really nasty design flaws of the Scorpion, which included "offers a ride so bumpy you might throw up your kidneys" and "is total balls at defending itself from infantry" among others.

>>6583502

Being more stable, they're also ideal for some weapons that pack a serious recoil. There's a weapon called the Heavy Gauss Rifle that has so much recoil when fired, it can knock a 'Mech over. Quads being more stable can pack one of these with less risk. Pic related, it's a Barghest-3T.

The big advantage mechs have over tanks it hit locations. Tanks only have 4 (or 5 if it has a turret) than can bet hit to a mech's 8.

If a tank loses any section it is dead but a mech can keep going after it loses it arms, legs, and sometimes its side torsos.

Its also easier to hit a given location on a tank. If you shoot at it from the front you most likely are going to hit the front armor. Damages gets spread around more on a mech.

Are tanks able to go hull down or receive bonuses on avoiding hits based on not being so tall?

>>6583579
No, you don't understand. The advantages I listed are designed specifically to favor mechs, which is why they're built that way.

And it's a two step process. First you roll to hit, then you see where you hit. a Mech's location table reads like this:

Head
C. Torso
L. Torso
R. Torso
R. Arm
R. Leg
L. Arm
L. Leg

In no specific order. Meanwhile, a tank's reads like this

Front
Front(motive damage)
Front(motive damage)
Right(motive damage)
Front
Front
Front
Left(motive damage)
Turret
Turret
Turret

It's an inbuilt advantage for mechs, because they're meant to be the kings of the battlefield.

And like I said, if that bothers you, get Tac Ops and use the rules to make tanks as good as mechs.

>>6583592
I always sort of visualized quad mechs should be tanks with 4 legs. I mean, just pack on an underslung turrent for anti infantry work and a overhead big gun for anti armor work. You can of course brace yourself far better with 4 legs if you're going to fire a giant cannon or something.

Does mechwarrior have drone units? Say, swarming suicide bomb type weapons? Seems like it'd be pretty effective to me.

>>6583441
what if we made a tank that turns into a mech?

>>6583616

They can take advantage of cover more easily.

>>6583616
Tanks can hull down, yes. It's EXTREMELY nasty with double nigger tier tanks like the Shrek.

>>6583592
It doesn't help that a lot of other designs tend to suffer from flaws as well.

>>6583579
Four legged mechs can't carry as many weapons, don't have arms, can't torso twist, and generally suffer from quite a few problems, which is why they're unpopular.

Vehicles can use jump jets as experimental tech, but it's basically unheard of anymore.

And Btech uses all ablative armor, not your standard fare, so the issue of mechs being under armored is a smaller one(and yes, tanks do get to put a lot more armor in spots because they've got fewer locations to spread it around, but that's where motive damage kicks in).

Btech is more to the realistic side, but it's hardly full on realism, and it has quite a few elements that are unrealistic for the sake of the game.

>>6583579

The motive-system damage is WITH armored tracks, wheels, hover skirts, etc. In-universe, the artificial muscles that propel 'Mechs are a more sturdy, effective and robust system than moving METAL BOXES.

Mind you, said boxes can generally take a lot more punishment, given equal amounts of armor tonnage. It's just that the tank has exposed movement systems, and the 'Mechs are completely armored by comparison, not to mention more redundant. Blow a track section off a tank, it's stuck. Gimp a 'Mech leg, and it's still coming (with a limp).

Two legged 'Mechs have wider fields of fire and can turn faster than quads as well, plus having hands is rather useful. 'Mechs are graceful enough to literally go mountain climbing at need, even if they don't have jump jets (as long as they have two hands).

>>6583633
>swarming suicide bomb type weapons

There are Swarm LRMS' You shoot them and if they miss the first target they try to find another target and so on until all the missiles hit or it runs out of targets.

>>6583633
The most Btech has for drones is scouting stuff, and even those really don't have in game rules. At least in the basic rules.

For the longest time, it really didn't have the technology to do that anyways.

>>6583604
That's basically the Fido unit from TA

>>6583674
You said it yourself: "experimental tech," which should more frequently be read as "munchkin faggot shit."

Sure, some experimental tech proves its worth and ends up real-tier (the IS plasma rifle, for example), but a lot of that shit is just silly.

>>6583625
I havn't yet played battletech, just wondering how it is justified that mechs are better.

do tanks have a signifigantly lower hit chance than mechs at least?

the only real way I could see that mechs are better is if you're constantly warring in cities. Logsitically that might necessitate that ALL your fighting forces are mechs, or else half your foce is at a huge disadvantage all the time. Hmmm...

>>6583633

TacOps has rules for drones, although I haven't bothered to look too closely at them yet. From a cursory read, drones have logistical drawbacks that depend largely on how good your support network is; if you're controlling a drone from another vehicle, you'll need wire guidance or a clear line of sight at all times to maintain control. If you've got a satellite uplink (and a satellite, and good fucking luck with that) their operational range becomes much wider.

>>6570530

Quads are also good for running through building like the koolaid man.

>>6583633

>>6583680

He's talking basically "guided bombs".

The answer is that human reflexes > drone guidance, and AI isn't good enough to really do the complex combat stuff when there's plenty of ways to jam the things. There are rules for drones, though- at one point, the old Star League had drone-piloted warships and defense platforms, and vehicles exist along those lines as well.

>>6583693
Fido had the gun in the center rather than off to the side like that, but yeah pretty much.

>>6570530
punt!

>>6583718

Kanrei, is that you?

>>6570530
and thats what i do to tanks little battletech!!!!

now to stomp some footslogers!!!!

>>6583701
No, hit chances are the same. Hit chances are determined by the skill rating of the pilot, how far you and your target have moved, the range of the weapons, and any support gear that applies(targeting computers, C3i, stuff like ECM in higher level rules)

And once again, you're approaching too much from a realism angle. Btech is a game, and it's designed that way.

And really, most fighting in the Btech universe is done with infantry, tanks, and the occasional mech. Mechs are expensive to keep and maintain, and even post 3050, it's still more common to see tanks on the field than it is mechs.

>>6583707
This isn't Gundam, where mechs win all the time no matter what. Underestimate a decent tank in Battletech and you'll get the beating you deserve.

>>6583701
>do tanks have a signifigantly lower hit chance than mechs at least?

no

>>6583744
See, this.

A 50 ton mech will be better than a 50 ton tank, but that doesn't mean that the tank can't tear the mech a new one.

>>6583744
blah blah .......oh FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

>>6583759
but the 50 ton tank will cost 1/2 - 1/3 as much as the 50 ton mech.

>>6583680
What about if drones, for example, weren't missile type but jumped onto enemy mechs in highly close quarters and proceeded to cut into them? Do mechs have a defense against some robot scampering up their leg and slicing into the back?

>>6583675
Why not just make tanks that use the mech "muscle" movement system, instead of gears and whatnot anyways. This should reduce moving parts and thereby reduce vulnerability to shock. I mean yeah you can blow tracks off of a tank, but surely they can be better armored than a mech's leg.

I mean, mech killer tanks in my mind would simply have giant recoil weapons. Mechs move with 2 legs, so 1 leg has to be in the air when they move. When a mech is using it's mobility you just hit it with a giant force gun to knock it over and then kill it while it's struggling to get up.

btw I don't mean armored tracks, I mean litearlly a skirt of armor around the track. So you'd be looking at a box with armor around the tracks at least as thick as that of a mech's legs.

>>6583701

Tanks are good. But ton-for-ton, a 'Mech can outarm, outarmor, and/or out maneuver a tank.

'Mechs are all-terrain. Vehicles aren't. You could be chasing one, it ducks through a forest, you're stuck at the edge. In the city, you're on the roads. It goes through the building- or over it. Jumps on top of a hill you can't get your tank up, or wades underwater, sneaks around your force and pops up out of the ocean and snipes your tank in the ass.

It's a lot tougher to stop a 'Mech from coming than it is a tank, and tanks are much more inefficient with energy weapons vs. a 'Mech.

Tanks are good with ballistic and missile weapons, mind you. But put a tank vs. a 'Mech one-on-one, and the 'Mech will generally perform better.

>>6583744
they dont allways win the during the early months of the one year war the zaku's biggest threat were tanks, tow missles, ied's so ya i dont underestamate tanks!

>>6583773

Yeah, the defense is called "reach down with your hand and crush the attacker" or "move around to shake the interloper loose" or even "plow right through a building and scrape the bastards off".

>>6583773
>jumped onto enemy mechs in highly close quarters and proceeded to cut into them

Thats called a inf swarm attack, and it hurts a lot when it works.

>Do mechs have a defense against some robot scampering up their leg and slicing into the back?

A-pods (for squishy infantry) and B-pods (for squishy infantry in a metal shell).

There's also machine guns, small pulse lasers, frag SRMs, flak autocannon rounds, flamers...

>>6583793

Or the ever-popular "radio the Firestarter from B company to trot over and wash them off with a brief bath of nuclear-powered ion flame."

>>6583793
My favorite is fall on the ground and throw a mech tantrum until all the little buggers are dead.

>>6583804
I introduced Infantry Swarm Attacks into Mekton

Shit is SO cash when a Gundam gets brought down by infantry ripping the hatch open and shooting the pilot.

Tanks are city kings, along with infantry. Cheap, can go anywhere, can fade easily. If you don't believe me, try being that Vulture pilot saying hi to the SRM carrier the next street over, or the Atlas pilot that just walked in front of a Hetzer parked at cockpit level in a parking garage.

>>6583773
Elementals can do the whole "climb on the mech's body" thing.

The answer to that is if the mech has arms, to just pry the Battle Armor off and kill it, or to fall over on purpose and roll around, crushing the armor.

The mech muscle movement system works just like that, a normal muscle, so it'd be difficult to make it work in a tank. Plus, there's the issue of cost: mechs are expensive to make, and the pilots are harder and take longer to train. Tanks are cheap, easy, and quick, can be repaired easier, and are generally a more cost efficient option.

You can knock a mech over, it's one of the better ways to try and take a mech out. Force a PSR due to damage, hope it fails, and then tear into it while it's on the ground.

But the other thing is that location hits are random, and aimed shots require a targeting computer.

Yes, Btech targeting systems suck. We know. It's as big of a joke as the weapon ranges, but it's a game.

this little bastard killed more zaku's then the fedy mobile suits did by the end of the war!!!!

>>6583773

Meet the Elemental, the original infantry power armor in Battletech. In fact, infantry anti-Mech tactics do just that- get on the 'Mech, cut into weak spots, try to kneecap them with satchel charges and the like.

Aside from simply snagging the offending PBI's and mashing them, smart pilots will literally stop, drop and roll or mount anti-infantry pods that basically act like claymores- shredding anything small and squishy as it tries to get aboard. Or jump and let old-fashioned intertia shake off the offending fellows.

The motive hits in BT take into account that those systems actually ARE armored to begin with, as part of the tank's armor.

>>6583835
>The mech muscle movement system works just like that, a normal muscle, so it'd be difficult to make it work in a tank.

WORM-TANK

MOVES BY SEGMENT CONTRACTION

>>6583862
OMG its segmenting back and forth. Is that lubricant coming out of the front? OMG ITS A PENIS TANK.

>>6583862
ya............ ummmm the protoss have that

>>6583858
Yea, motive systems require two hits to work. You have to roll on the table, and if you get motive damage, you roll 2d6 to see if it does anything. 2-5 does nothing, while the rest causes various motive damage, from increased difficult to flat out destruction.

How easy motive systems are to damage depends on where the attack came from and what kind of vehicle it is.

And to bring an old-school comparison- think of a 'Mech as being a lot like this fellow. Only instead of being squishy, the entire humanoid structure is built to support and protect, with weapons intergral to the armored shell and internal structure rather than just being carried by a fragile fleshy thing inside.

It can distribute, deflect, and deliver a shitload of firepower.

>>6583835
Speaking of targeting, after seeing the MW5 video and thinking a bit, of the following, how do the missiles in Btech work?

1. Dumbfire- Rockets fly out straight ahead from launcher without an initial course correction. Unguided.

2. Torpedo- Missiles launch with an initial course correction to intercept a target at a certain point. Guidance may be minimal, so a certain spread is programmed in.

3. Semi-Active Homing- Guided missiles launch, home on target which is painted by mech or other means. Lose lock if painting fails.

4. Active Homing- Missiles each have their own sensor system, allowing them to home on a target independently.

>>6583822

Or "grab one of them and throw the fucker five blocks"

>>6583858

I think I read some fluff somewhere about a 'mech pilot intentionally overheating his reactor by firing his entire arsenal at an enemy 'mech nonstop, performing an auto-shutdown bypass, and then venting superheated air from the reactor to fry an Elemental climbing up his 'mech. I wish I could remember where I read it, since it seemed odd to me that that would work when an Elemental is ostensibly armoured enough to withstand a hit from a light laser, which seems like it would create more localized heat than the discharge from a fusion jar.

>But ton-for-ton, a 'Mech can outarm, outarmor, and/or out maneuver a tank.

Uhm... no they can't.

The only thing mechs have on tanks in battletech is speed. Tanks are slow, but they carry more armor and heavier weapons.

>>6583862
This seems like it has potential!

Also, are there any sensor disruption weapons? So like instead of a burst of missiles to blow up a mech, shoot a burst of missiles that blind the mech.

>>6583899
Active Homing, but all seek same target.

>>6583899

Depending on the missiles, all of these are valid. MRM's are 1), LRM's and SRM's are 2), and some augmented guidance systems fall under 3) and 4).

Arrow IV artillery missiles can be laser-guided, for example (a TAG system). LRM's and SRM's can have an infrared beam that helps focus a missile spread (Artemis IV) if something doesn't mess with the data coming back. NARC pods can be stuck on an opponent and help things along, much like 3).

>>6583899
All of them.

>>6583899

I think it's 1 and 4. Since the targeting computers in Battletech tend to be terrible, missiles are either the "fire a million of them in that direction and hope one or two of them score direct hits" variety, or guided missiles controlled by a computerized IFF lock. There may be some overlap - I think some of the dumbfire missiles are capable of limited homing capabilities with a decent targeting computer - but most of them fall into one of those two camps.

I think. Fuck, it's been forever. I should get back into Battletech.

>>6583899
A bit of each. Rockets are plain old dumbfire, SRMs and LRMs are generally semi guided(you roll to see how many missiles hit once you achieve a lock), but there's a lot of systems that can improve their guidance. Streaks, for example, are designed to fire only when you get a clean lock, so they always hit 100% of the time.

>>6583920
There are chaft pods that can do tha,t EMP-LRM ammo, and mech tasers in tac ops.

And Haywire iNarc pods for not tac ops.

>>6583915

This is a Schrek PPC carrier, an 80 ton tank mounting 3 PPC's. Now, we compare that to...

>>6583899
All missiles except Streaks, semi-guided, or NARC missiles are dumbfire.

The targeting system in the mech of course helps you aim your missiles on target, but they're all still basically just rocket motors with an explosive warhead on top.

>>6583970

...this fellow, the Awesome, an 80-ton 'Mech.

>>6583935
I would think MRMs and SRMs at a minimum could get a quickie target solution and then fire a spread at the area where the mech will be, but that is just the realist in me. Depends heavily on flight time.

>>6583970
>>6583981
Alacorn and Thunderhawk are both superior.

>>6583970
Already flawed comparison.

Shreks are designed to be support vehicles, not front line support.

Bet you compare it to a Warhawk.

>>6583899
Battletech missiles are Macross Missile Spam in spirit.

What you saw was a targeted shot by the Jenner (foiled by the parking garage), a blind shot by the Warhammer (causing silly rocket spinning), and a targeted shot by the Atlas (oddly, with what are usually LRM racks).

>>6583981
Bah, should have guessed an Awesome.

But really, a Shrek is nearly half the BV of an Awesome.

>>6583985

They can- if the 'Mech is there. "Standard" movement includes the pilot actually moving, dodging, etc. to keep from giving the opponent an easy-line shot. (There are optional rules for sprinting all-out instead, though this leaves you a mite easier to shoot at).

Dumfire - Rocket launchers and MRM's

Torpedo - SRM and LRM

Semi-active - LRM's with Artemis system, semi-guided ammo, or Narc ammo, MRM's with Apollo system

Active - Thunderbolt and Streak SRMs

>>6584003

Schreks and Awesomes are both 3025-tech rules, and yes- the Schrek is cheaper by BV. That's because it's an inferior unit for the weight- and it's not like other 'Mech vs. tank by tonnage comparisons aren't similar.

Calling the Schrek "support" doesn't matter. It's as good as a vehicle gets for the time, and the 'Mech packs double the armor the tank does. Moving the same speed (with better ability over terrain) and with higher levels of damage tolerance.

>>6583995

The Thunderhawk and Alicorn are both higher tech levels, but another good comparison. Just wanted to keep it relatively simple there.

Are you two done waving your dicks? Can we talk about things that are fun and awesome now?

>>6584071
Compare it to the Gauss Demo.

It's a 3060 vehicle, but it's mounting 3025 tech. At the same tonnage, it's got nearly as much armor, is just as fast, and can deal damage at the same ranges. It has no problems with heat, and can fire everything every single turn, and packs enough ammo to last a whole game.

It's the same BV value as a base Awesome, and for good reason. In a one on one duel, the fight between the two could easily go either way.

Urbanmechs: The best 'mech, or the bestest 'mech?

I don't understand why ton for ton tanks would be less armored or heavily gunned than mechs.

Can someone give me a mass breakdown of a tank vs mech?

>Why not just make tanks that use the mech "muscle" movement system, instead of gears and whatnot anyways. This should reduce moving parts and thereby reduce vulnerability to shock.

GODDAM SNAIL TANK!

>>6584258
It's not awesome.

>>6584275
They're neither.

It's the hit locations and motive system that cause them so many problems.

>>6584291

No, this is an Awesome.

But that's not what's important here. Answer the question! BEST MECH OR BESTEST MECH?! I REMIND YOU THAT YOU ARE UNDER OATH!

>>6571377
Oh yes. Some are nice point fillers, some are specialised plattforms that really shine in a combined arms deployment. A perfect example are LRM and SRM carriers. And some are just treaded mosnbters that make Mechs very uneasy. Case in point: Alacorn Mk VI. Or the true nightmare: Demolishers in a city-fight. Our local tread-head once really put down a rookie who bragged that his medium/heavy Clan Binary (Mechs only) could take on a company of whatever IS armor you would put up agianst them, in any terrain. Cue our tread-head veteran arranging a city-fight and fielding 8 Demolishers and 4 LRM carriers for indirect support.

>>6582343
Heh. Remembers me of the Catapult variant I once designed for the lulz, nicknamed the Derka-pult. It was armed with RL-10s only. 32 RL-10s. Alphaing the thing would pretty much blow up the Mech.

>>6583729
Problem is most heavier BT tanks will survive a kick. And the proceed to fire their entire arsenal into the offending Mechs face. Try doing that shit to a Demolisher with something in the weight class of a Zaku and your support personnel will afterwards be busy collecting all the parts of your Mech with shovels and brooms.

>>6583960
And, if you want to be silly, the spray gun loaded with paint.

>>6584071
The comparison is a bit skewed by the fact that tanks get shafted when it comes to energy weapons.

>>6584566
They only get shafted if they don't have a fusion engine, god damn power converters.

>>6584661
Even then. No integral heat sinks and SHS only, while you have to put in enough to fire every weapon at the same time.

>>6584679
Oh yeah forgot about that. At least they get to use ballistic weapons for no heat.

>>6584710
More important is that they get to use MISSILE weapons for no heat.

This makes rocket batteries truely heinous.

>>6584679

Yep. Mechs get more toys- the biggie being double-strength heat sinks. Vehicles go with ballistic/missile weapons instead, which tend to deliver less damage/ton than energy weaponry does. 'Mechs also can get lighter-weight internal structure as well, and don't have to build enough sinks into a 'Mech to soak all it's heat.

"Hey, what's that dot on the hilltop way over thAVFGYIDKVQAHFNKAGNFUCKBLAMMO"

>>6573584

Okay, someone please tell me the name of whatever merc unit this is.

I think I'v found a new love for the Canopians, because you just -know- they're the ones responsible for this.

>>6586216
someone doesn't know how to read file names

>>6585416

When you absolutely, positively need to dump 80 LRM's on something. Right now. Cheap.

And they can go hull down for good measure, on top of indirect fire. Mmm. Too bad they go FOOM if you sneeze wrong at one, but who cares?

>>6586216

These guys, you mean?

>>6581477
What mech's that?

>>6588223
looks like a hollander of some description

>>6586216
Aren't they like an entire nation of militant black lesbians?

>>6588247

Correct. It's the BZK-F3, the first Hollander model to walk off the production line.

>>6580771

What is this.

WHAT IS THIS HERESY?

There can only be one 'mech with a laser-shooting cigar!

>>6589526

> laser-shooting cigar.

WAT

>>6589630

Forgot my picture.

But seriously, WAT?

>>6589630
>>6589653

Yes, the 'mech is designed to look like it's chomping on a cigar. Yes, the cigar is in fact a sponson-mounted small laser that can slide from one side of the 'mech's face to the other. No, I am not making this up; Battletech really is that completely cheezily awesome.

> This thread.

>>6589679

Holy fucking shit.

HOW IS THIS THREAD STILL GOING

>>6589701

Because this is a Battletech thread. It is made of Battletech and fuck-awesome.

>>6589526

This is the best 'mech ever designed. It's like fucking Al Capone or some shit. You'd best watch out.

>>6579173
Did anyone else immediately think "BATTLETOADS!" when they saw this?

>>6589892

Oh my god, that poor poor Uziel model...what has been done to you!

>>6590469

Day-Glo Enema

>>6589526
Ahh, the Hauptmann.
The first Lyran Omnimech. And Lyrans being Lyrans, it's a fucking 95-ton monster.
The creed of House Steiner: Need moar gun!

>>6590582
>it's a fucking 95-ton monster.

Okay. Modern main battle tanks have mobility problems when they get over around 70 tons. Something that's suspended on two legs is going to have a much higher ground pressure/square inch and you're going to have problems with it sinking into the ground.

>>6589892
I thought more on the lines of "HUUUURRRR FOOTBALL".

>>6590655
Tonnage in Btech is an abstract concept, used to measure their various sizes rather than any actual weight.

If you crunch the actual numbers, most Battlemechs end up being less dense than water.

>>6590686

water balloon mech

it's like a water bed with missiles

What, no bulldog?

>>6590721
>>6583227

>>6590655
Battletech is highly unrealistic. Don't expect realism if you don't want to be disappointed. If you do want to be disappointed, then go and be happy. But not on MY internet. NO HAPPINESS ALLOWED.

>>6591817
I wouldn't say Battletech is highly unrealistic.

Really, it's a lot closer to realism than most sci-fi wargames, it just happens to have some unrealistic elements.

>>6591884
Battlemechs are unrealistic. Very much so. The laws of physics make them absolutely completely ridiculously impossible, or at very best, implausible. But they're a cool idea, so we handwave all that away.

>>6590655

Fun fact: If a 'Mech was real, it's feet would actually deliver about the same ground pressure as treads. The resident real-life engineer types on the CBT boards did the math.

>>6591964
Fun fact: Bullshit. Show me the math.