Realistically speaking what are the mechs even contributing to this military force that you couldn't get by just swapping out the APCs for IFVs instead?
Fuck off with this spam
>>64613101In the pic? Two of 'em are significantly more maneuverbale than a Goblin IFV, and the Centurion just packs a bunch more armor and firepower than one.
>>64613101if they skip their movement phase they can summon demons
Increased military recruitment. Use like a car dealership would use a loss leader.>oh damn! you didnt make it as a mech pilot after all in the simulation! but, since you are here anyway, I think you'd do great as a gunner in a Bradley
>>64613101they look cooler
>>64613109>Two of 'em are significantly more maneuverable than a Goblin IFVDoes that really matter? You probably don't want to leave the safety of your infantry escort and your infantry goes where the IFV's can go, so have more maneuverability doesn't seem all that important.
>>64613101A mech can dig through a building to go after a particular guy, snatch him, and carry him away for enhanced interrogation. This also means they tend to scare people. If you read between the lines, early mechs were effective not because the humanoid design actually offered much in the way of benefits, so much as they were recipients of cutting edge tech and people panicked and didn't know how to fight them effectively.
>>64613146Shut the fuck up, retard. Doctrine would obviously have to change if they were implemented. You sound like an ordnance board boomer.
>>64613101Really small Mechs could exist in a Goldilocks zone where they reduce the lethal radius of explosives exponentially (head to toe LV 4+ EOD suit alone would be a complete game changer if you could afford the weight and heat) and can carry weapons that dominate infantry engagements and threaten armor significantly, while also being able to take cover in areas 1/10th the size of an IFV.
>>64613101aura
>>64613224>Doctrine would obviously have to change if they were implementedNot if you want them to survive
>>64613228 like 3 meters tall or what
>>64613397Power-armor size, they should be able to fit inside and ride an IFV
>>64613248Nah, mechs in BT are basically the tank triangle with each side maxed. Highly mobile, well armored, good firepower. They operate in lances, which is the support. Tying them to infantry would just slow them way down and make their armor advantage mean a lot less.
>>64613397Smaller the better, you just need to get a couple hundred pounds of extra carrying capacity on a guy in the smallest frame possible.
>>64613457>inBetter yet, on. Id they're already power armored up, no need in making the carrier so big and heavy to fit them inside an armored box. The "dismount compartment" would belike center beam rolling stock where the armors are attached back to back, with the motive and crew compartment being the only actually armored part
>>64613458So they're magic
>>64613710The locomotion system basically is. But it only works with limb-like machinery. Realistically all of Battletech’s tanks and IFVs should be up on little doggy legs to take advantage of it.
>>64613710It's not even a thing with current tech, last I checked abrams can go 50+ km/h and operate it squadrons like mechs do. Mobility is still important. That's a question of tactics, not design
>>64613723And there's absolutely no way that a mech in a humanoid shape is going to somehow miraculously do better on the armor side of the triangle than a freakin' tank.
>>64613718The in universe reason they don't actually makes some sense, myomer is expensive and power hungry. And the peoduction facilities are few and far between compared to what they were in the star league era.
>>64613729They don't even in the setting. They're just a lot more mobile and harder to hit. Heavy tanks in battletech have more armor than most mechs and cost way less. They are also pretty slow and move in a predictable fashion
>>64613739It doesn't help that tank crews are trash in the setting since they only take the rejects that couldn't qualify for mech duty
>>64613120Bradleys would destroy mechs like they did to that T-90. Bradley is eternal
>>64613818The bushmaster is basically an ac/2, it wouldn't have much of an effect for awhile
>>64613718Realistically they'd just have myomer driven crankshafts.
>>64613823Tbf they consider the Arrow IV to be lostech and that's just a basic bitch BVR missile.
>>64613829Bt has a lot of weird inconsistencies for a variety of reasons. It's a goofy IP and I love it
>>64613823>The bushmaster is basically an ac/2Between the ROF and the available ammo I'd classify it as a UAC/2, which upgrades it from "mildly annoying unless there are a dozen of them" to "why did our scout lance not come back".The UAC/2 basically fires M919 by default.
>>64614132Ya that makes sense I guess. I never played with UAC/2's, only 5's really
>>64614132A UAC2 is just two AC2 with a chance to jam, did you mean RAC2?
None of these replies address the three key factors how mechs became so prominent in battletech >TerrainMany of the planets in this setting are largely undeveloped. Mechs are able to deal with this variety in terrain>SpaceJump ships are relatively few and valuable. Packing the highest punch into the smallest container is a significant Logistics priority, and that's where mechs win out >In-universe materialsBattletech has some kind of synthetic light-but-strong muscle material that makes these mechs a lot more viable than they would be otherwise
>>64614150>Mechs are able to deal with this variety in terrainTreads would handle anything better than mechanical legs>Packing the highest punch into the smallest container is a significant Logistics priorityTanks would have more combat ability per unit of weight realistically>Battletech has some kind of synthetic light-but-strong muscle material that makes these mechs a lot more viable than they would be otherwiseThere is no reason it wouldn't be applied to wheeled or tracked vehicles
>>64614165>treads would handle anything better than legsNo, they wouldn't. They can do flat and mostly flat, but anything hire than the track is an impassible obstacle. This is why I hate these threads, it's fully of faggot midwits that can't even get the reasons mechs are stupid right. Tou just say "no nuh uh" to everything, get fucking creative once in your life. You don't even have to be a high school graduate to figure this one out, just think about itRobot Locomotion - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics https://share.google/UrozeQALlLBkLQzf5
>>64614174Didn't readGround pressure
>>64614187>didn't readThis much is clear
>>64614187Ground pressure is actually easy to solve for. For instance, a 70 ton machine would only need a "foot" of around 85 square feet to match the ground pressure of an mbt. That could be drastically reduced if need be, wheeled afv's often have ground pressures as high as 30psi which would only require an area of 32 square feet at the same weight. That is AT MOST the size of garden shed in terms of foot print
>>64614174It would help if there were some mech settings that didn't insist on jerking off the mechs at every opportunity
>>64614244>>64614187Also don't forget that ground pressure is a major consideration strictly because of the way wheeled and tracked vehicles move. If a wheeled or tracked vehicle sinks into the ground, it essentially has to propel itself up and out of that depression, or push material out of it's way as it moves forward. The deeper it sinks, the more work this takes. This is how vehicles get bogged down. Limbed locomotion doesn't have this problem, though, because it doesn't have to propel itself up out of the depression it creates or push through the substrate, the limbs are lifted off the ground regardless
>>64614250Brother that's why it's a mech settingBattletech has plenty of instances where mechs get obliterated by air, land, and sea
>>64614250Battletech does the best job of this as far as I know, because every other form of weapon is also pretty OP in their own ways. Spamming vehicles can demolish just about any mech force of similar value if you know how to play them. Attack aircraft work super well against them both in canon and in play
I kinda want to get into battletech. Got a few ideas for a silly pirate force.
>>64614271>>64614262That's just a gameplay thing, and the players won't even let you take advantage of it because the game 'breaks' if you bring too many units onto the field from the initiative system. In the lore the mechs basically dominate everything all the time because they're just bullshit OP weapons
The only case i can see of mechs being usefull are either in the role the imperial guard uses the Sentinel.Or like the C12 in cod, it isnt a tank, it will not fill that role, instead you make it extremely beefy and fill it with guns so it has much more firepower like a emplaced gun, but a lot of them and they can relocate if needed, bonus it can remove fences and similar and you can tow it with an IFV, you make it a robot with lots of armor and redundancy this way you can slightly cope with the lesser good armor and so on, and maybe you can upgrade its shooting with other team member to direct the rockets.Another example would be the mechs from helldivers 1 when you need move around swamps and uther hazardous terrain but still bring heavy firepower to bear with some armor.In all cases it shouldnt be taller than 4 mt
The sentinel is good because it mantains mobility with its long raptor like leg, ita supposed to be basical an augmentation for scouts or a perimeter defender when armored up, and in that it d work well to augment your armor cheaply
>>64614138>A UAC2 is just two AC2 with a chance to jam, did you mean RAC2?Nah. A UAC/2 is basically just an AC/2 with a higher burst ROF and more range. The part about it firing M919s is mostly fluff because the UAC/2 default ammo is DU penetrators while the standard ammo for the AC/2 is HEAP. Despite the identical damage. A RAC/2 is more like a rate-limited GAU-12.>>64614278>using a coaxial machine gun against a 70-ton mech
>>64614298They intentionaly don't crew tanks with the best and brightest
>>64614303the basedest Davion drove a tank, thoughever
>>64614278>That's just a gameplay thingNo, it's a lore thing
>>64613823Nh bushmaster would count as primitive rifle, or maybe even hmg?, which rule wise would severely hamper its potential to damage non-primitive vehicles.
>>64614356It's really not. You can easily make an ASF build that's literally impossible to shoot back while the ASF's are allowed to bomb your mechs with impunity, but in lore that never happens.
>>64614356>No, it's a lore thingvery well, so>>64614271>of similar valuedefine "value"go on
>>64614363You're playing using areospace range bands against the abstract map scale aren't you? Everyone knows that's wrong.
>>64614386Exactly my point. The game breaks the seconod you try to actually apply the rules it gives you. You add too many units and it breaks initiative, use air units too high and it breaks combat, use too many Arrow IV's and it breaks combat, etc. Hell, even the whole "ASF's nosedart straight into the ground when they take damage" is a retcon because they were doing too good before.The game is basically telling you not to engage with most of its systems because otherwise it breaks.
>>64614278>gifIs a tank just made out of paper or something? Even if the Mech was able to crush it, it would still have to walk over it, not through it, lol.
>>64614400Battletech is full of shit like that, pic related is literally a lore event where a single lance of Mackies took out an entire combined arms battalion of tanks supported with infantry and air support and took no casualties of their own in the process, and these were with the early shitty prototype mechs you wouldn't be caught dead with today.
>>64614393>breaksActually all that other shit is optional for scenario games and almost no players ever touch them. It's so you can turn the mech fight game into a semi-functional historical reenactment game, using a GM, layers of homerules and gentleman's agreements. Of course obsessives launch right into it and start ranting about how this one unit only even included for representing the battle for burger town actually costs negative BV and is technically the most powerful weapon in the game. The game is actually telling you to have fun games with your friends and you are not capable of meeting it on that level.
>>64614400That woudl have been more work to animateJust repeat the same walk cycle and obscure the tank under effect spam
>>64614413>alright so it is a gameplay thingConcession accepted
>>64614419Go make another 1000 threads about it, my cumslave.
>>64613101all-terrain speedsingle pilot, no crew requirementmore firepower than a same weight tankcan't be stepped on as easily as a tankThey are a force multiplier, rapid response force which costs more for the privilege. Similar to asking "What does jet airplane do prop airplane doesn't?"
>>64613823Isn't an ac/2 more like a 57mm?
>>64614423>more firepower than a same weight tankThat seems extremely dumb
>>64614376>define "value"The listed BV points? Are you retarded anon, or have you never played a tabletop wargame?
>>64614430Turrets add weight and mechs usually have lighter-weight engines, not sure what if anything else plays into it.>>64614376Everything has a book value for gameplay purposes and a "c-bill" value for actual in universe monetary value. Fancier, higher tech mechs cost maybe 2.5x a simpler, low-tech mech of similar capability. Vehicles cost a third of an economic mech of the same weight and maybe 3/5 the game value. If you wanted to win every game, you would just take all vehicles. They are better by cost. But the setting is about mechs, so only a loser would do that.
Wtf are you doing hereGet your ass back in /m/
>>64614435I'm not the retard who claims>No, it's a lore thingand goes on to talk about BV>>64614444>a "c-bill" value for actual in universe monetary valuenope>That's just a gameplay thing
>>64614592ok bud lemme know how it goes trying to buy a clan mech for the price of a same ton IS mech on Solaris.
>>64614628the whole point is that the information is not known in an in-universe sense, you stupid fuck
>>64614646Anon are you trying to suggest that people in universe don't understand that armor is cheaper than mechs?Because they do, they literally have to pay for this shit. They don't spam armor because the primary gating factor in battle tech is junpship and drop ship capacity, you can't actually move enough armor to reliably overwhelm a regiment of mechs. There's also the issue of the successor states being feudal, you don't want to risk your march lord dying in a fucking bulldog, so you slap his ass in an enforcer, so he's more durable and can actually eject if need be.
>>64614592It's a game, everything is, strictly speaking, a gameplay thing.>>64614646BV is a metabalance, but c-bills and tonnage do exist in-universe.
>>64613101Logistics and combat engineering. Having arms means you can move shit like supplies and dirt. Excavators are practically 1/3 mech already.
>>64615260>c-bills and tonnage do existthe tonnage is in the lore because the specific values are mentioned narratively in the novels, but you won't find anything in any novel that goes like "x costs y c-bills" because the only actual c-bill values are only given for gaming purposes>>64615249>the primary gating factor in battle tech is junpship and drop ship capacitycitation?don't bother looking, you won't find itI'm old enough to have been there when this fan theory was first promulgated, so don't try and pretend it's actual lore>are you trying to suggest that people in universe don't understand that armor is cheaper than mechs?I'm saying that we have never been given the information to judge in-universe how much more expensive Mechs are than tanks5x? 10x? 20x?you'll never know because you're not meant to knowthat is why >>64614406 and >>64614278 are correctfucking textalks nogamers...
>>64613101>can't drop ifvs and tanks from orbit>tanks can't spend a month buttoned up on an airless moon>tanks can not into rough terrain>or swamps>inb4 hoovertonks
>>64613228>>64613457>>64613397In the real world, you're looking for something like Pitman or one of those hard diving suits.In Battletech, the rules allow for down to 10 ton 'Mechs but no one has found a killer app for it. I suspect, depending on the BT era, that a 10 tonner could mog battlearmor.
>>64615322>you won't find anything in any novel that goes like "x costs y c-bills" because the only actual c-bill values are only given for gaming purposesNot true at all. In some of the House Davion books they directly talk about 'Mech costs in C-bills. IIRC, there are some discussion about the resource costs to build 'Mechs among Wolf Clan, too. I just checked, the old Technical Readouts don't include the price for each 'Mech but we used to use C-bills (this is decades ago, oldfag here) to value fights because Battle Value didn't exist yet. So that means that somewhere in the rules and books we had a list of the price of each 'Mech and vehicle. I'm not saying I invented Savannah Master spam but was spamming SMs in the early '90s.
>>64615322In novels they can't make a definite statement about what costs what in c-bills as c-bills are a commodity rather than a currency so the value fluctuates depending on location. That's not even getting into scarcity of the items themselves as not all products are available uniformly across the galaxy.
>>64615386The problem with c-bills as an abstraction is that it doesn’t change through the timeline. A Mech that’s cutting edge in 3067 shouldn’t cost the same as the same model in 3150.
>>64613101Nothing
>>64613458>highly mobileOnly in ways that don't matter and at the cost of being a far easier target and requiring far more maintenance.>armorA tank would be far better protected than a mech and could carry heavier armor without having as many structural weak points.>good firepower.A tank would be able to carry more.
looking cool is half the battle
>>64615386>somewhere in the rules and books we had a list of the price of each 'Mech and vehiclewe know>In some of the House Davion books they directly talk about 'Mech costs in C-billsnot in any of the novels>>64615408>c-bills are a commodity rather than a currencyby the same logic we can't "make a definite statement about what costs are in ounces of gold today"illogical>the value fluctuates depending on locationironically, until the Clans came, the C-bill is actually rock solid>That's not even getting into scarcity of the items themselves as not all products are available uniformly across the galaxyTHIS is the real reasonI don't think it's debatable to say that scarcity is the number one driver of price (not cost, PRICE)supply-and-demand and all thatso once again: C-bill lists are a game abstraction
>>64615445>only in ways that don't matterNope>a tank would be better armoredAlso no. At best it's about the same>a tank can carry moreAgain, no. At best it would be about the same. Look, I'm not trying to say mechs are a good idea. Just that you midwit faggots love coming into mech threads when no one fucking asked and you can't even be bothered to be correct as to why mechs are silly
>>64613101low gravity worlds would work for mechs that have no atmosphere to push around with engines
>>64615322Seriously? You need a citation for jumpships being a limited resource, with limited docking collars?You need one for drop ships having finite bay space?If you have one jumpship and three overlords, you aren't going to be able to move enough armor to overwhelm three overlords worth of mechs if your enemy fields them. Consequently, you bring as many mechs as you can.
>>64613829Arrow IV is a semi-ballistic artillery missile, and was "lostech" for a while after human civilization nuked itself back a couple centuries and then everyone was too busy to go redevelop it for the next two centuries becuase they were fighting a broken back war.
>>64614298Okay, just about all of that is wrong? UAC/2 has identical range the the standard AC/2, and autocannon shells can be either kinetic penetrators or HEAP depending on the specific model of autocannon. Makes no real difference in practice.>using a coaxial machine gun against a 70-ton mechI mean that tank crew is completely fucked either way. Might as well go down blasting. (Also, 65 tons if we're anal about it.)>>64614406Well they were "the early shitty ones" (not prototypes tho, the Mackie was in full production by that point), but that still put basically everything on them a generation ahead of those tanks and the infantry weapons they stomped through at the time. The Mackie is shit compared to even Lostech-era Mechs, but at the time of its debut it was effectively akin to a F-22 in a world full of mid-4th gens.
>>64614363Are you retarded? What was Tukayyid? Elementals? The entire FWLM? Does your entire experience come from the mechwarrior games?
Go the kojiima route and just give them nukes to be mobile missile platforms, coat the thing in stealth paint, and then make a small nuclear powered reactor in the thing so it never has to land like that crackhead Lockheed bomber project. Although at that point, might as well make it a full plane and just make an Arsenal Bird like Ace Combat.
>>64616427>What was Tukayyid?A battle where about 75% of the vehicles involved even on the Inner Sphere's side were battlemechs
>>64615654They're silly because everything you just said is blatantly wrong via the rules of geometry and your mechs are basically just magic.
>>64615907you think these are the only 2 facts and this is the only possible answer?
>>64613101Has this artist done work for Xenonauts before? That style looks familiar to some of the stuff I've seen in that game
>>64613733>>64613729>>64613723>>64613710>magic mechaWho wants an Extended-range Heavy Pulse Laser with compact triple heatsinks?
>>64614298>A UAC/2 is basically just an AC/2 with a higher burst ROF and more rangeA UAC/2 is an AC/2 that can double its fire rate at a risk of jamming and is slightly heavier. The range bands are almost the exact same (with the UAC having one extra hex of range in medium and long).
>>64617536Tarcomped Clan LPL will do
howdy
>>64613823>>64614132>>64614138>>64614298>>64614361Calibers vary within the same "class" of AC, and the usual explanation is that "AC" levels are a purely game abstraction and the term is not used in universe. A fact that some writers forget.The way one AC2 can be a 20mm gun and another AC2 can be a 60mm gun is usually explained, when anyone cares to, with a dramatic difference in Rate of Fire, as in a 20mm gun with a fire rate of 10,000 rounds per minute is equated with a higher caliber gun that fires less per minute. Muzzle velocity could also be used as an explanation for some wiggle room, but you see that mentioned less.This is also why you will occasionally see something like a 150mm AC20 and a 200mm AC15.ACs as a rule have a higher rate of fire than any real world weapon of similar caliber. One anon who occasionally posts here sticks to a rule of thumb where he just multiplies the AC number by ten and calls it a day, disregarding any subtlety past that."MGs" in Battletech are "low caliber" weapons with an extreme rate of fire that can be used against mechs but do bonus damage to smaller less armored units."Rifle" class weapons are a tricky thing: They do normal damage to non mech class armor, but significantly reduced damage to mech armor. They come in three scales, and unfortunately the smallest and the largest have been compared to a modern tank gun, while the MIDDLE size was once compared to some tank gun from WW2 I cant recall off hand. "Light rifles" (the smallest) cant even effectively damage Mechs (doing zero damage on the tabletop to represent this), so obviously the setting is very different in scale if what's being called a Light rifle is a 120mm round or a British 2 pounder.Shit half the writers cant even decide how big the fucking mechs are. In one of the recent video games they're like 50% taller (and thus twice the volume) than in one of the sources everyone defaults to online and no one bothers to make any sense of it.
>>64617851They also move at twice the speed in the video games.
>>64617851>One anon who occasionally posts here sticks to a rule of thumb where he just multiplies the AC number by ten and calls it a dayfor calibres in millimetres?it's a grog thing, I was introduced to it myself by a very old player (fella might've even played in the Battledroids era) and I myself find it oddly charming
>>64613101Obtaining government fundingIt's already becoming a thing
>>64616561They're silly for reasons you can't even begin to comprehend, anon.And that's the fun.
>>64614363In lore they basically can not do any "builds" at all, because of the lostech situation, they have to take the variants that are already developed. Any modification is a major recourse eating project, if your tech base can even let you do it, and the outcome quality is always uncertain.The little storys about how some nations got to have the worst variant of a certain mech chassis in the technical readouts are always fun to read.
>>64615445In universe high level sensors and target aquisition systems are not there or basically Lostech, and the best stuff is does not get wasted on tanks. Good pilots, in lore, can do some ninja shit and not dodge the bullet, but react to the weapon system being brought on target and sidestep some incoming fire, because it is all a bit slower than with real wolrd systems.And mech armor IS a bit more space magic than tank armor. Nobody builds mechs in the real world for a reason, but in within the game rules anything that is not a mech is basically 10 times as likely to get a random armor breach in a weakspot upon hit.After that a tank has basically only mobility kill, crew kill, or catastrophic engine explosion on the crit effect list.A mech might just loose an ankle actuator and get a bit slower, or loose a single secondary weapon system.This stuff gets actually represented pretty good in MWO5 and MWO Online, after some training people get absurddly good in only presenting fresh armor to tank enemy fire. And that is (in MWO) with a whole lance of human pilots trying to focus fire. It is really great fun to tank shots as a stick with legs while your buddys in the back kill the opposition.P.S. i kind of lost the plot about what i wanted to actually discuss, about so take this just as a nerdy rules exposition and disregard my post on your convenience.
>>64616451You have nukes ina gravity well, that jumpship that send a few dropships has more nukes, outside of it. They tried it, and that is the reason for the whole Lostech situation and the in univere rules of conduct.
>>64617851>In one of the recent video games they're like 50% taller (and thus twice the volume)Pretty sure the devs even said that the mechs are too large. Witth the decision to make them so big being the results from tester responses which considered them always too small. Same reason why the mechs move at different speeds in 1st and 3rd person
>>64617851This, AC in universe is defined as "gun that can strip this much of armour grade X over Y amount of time by using about Z amount of weight". It makes very little sense except by account of the fact that its a lot easier to simply transpose game mechanics into novels than teach engineering to their authors. What's annoying then is making sense of all the variants. The one ancillary issue however is that BT cannon rules treat novels as the highest jurisprudence, so once that, or other terms like armor points or the flaking plates get so hilariously plastered all over the place, it ends up sticking forever.
>>64618823Speeds in BT are absurdly low for what they want visually. These Mechs are meant to walk, even run, with a semi natural gait, and there's a minimum speed attached to a natural gait depending on the length of your legs. A lot of BT Mechs would have to do that glacially slow penguin walk where you shuffle tiny steps foreword to match their listed speed.You can see this in Armored Core 6, where if you land your mech on the ground you can walk or run, and get an accurate real world speed. Lo and behold, the ACs that are the size of Battlemechs walk and run at almost the exact speed they move in the video games, because a player and a designer knows instantly how normal walking speed looks.
>>64620644And then you have dumb shenanigans like that one Blakist ultralight that can do something like 350+ kmh
>>64620892Imagine a giant mechanical greyhound going the speed of a Nascar racer
Mechfags are the mlp posters of /k/, but even less justified in ever being here.
>>64622839>/mlp/ belongs in /k/ more than mechaKys
>>64623228How did you fuck up understanding that badly./m/ is your containment board just like /mlp/ is theirs after getting exiled from /co/.
>>64623253>makes an ordinal statement>REEEE I MEANT NOMINALYou don't even know the meaning of the words you said, untermensch.
>>64623304Calm your autism.
>>64613228
>>64623320>the concept of "even less" is too difficult for me to grasp, it must be autismVery well.
>>64623338That!s just an Elemental without the 7 foot tall genetically perfect* waifu inside.*-some restrictions apply
>>64618823For PGI it's also a balancing thing. Since all the guns are pinpoint accurate and adjust instantly to PoA, the only way to make light mechs not eat shit 25/8 is to make them way smaller than the larger gunboats so they're a much harder target, so lights are scaled down and heavies and assaults also get scaled way up.
>>64614261This. Visualize what happens when you put weight on one of your legs and it sinks into mud.
>>64613101Manueverability and being able to traverse basically any terrain even steep cliffs. A mech should be able to both climb the side of a mountain and also just jump down a cliff into a ravine and climb back out. Otherwise probably nothing, unmanned mechs would obviously be the way to go but why have those when you can have UAVs if youre already dumping billions into it?
>>64614261>>64623740Unless you have ground penetrating radar your mechs have a chance of finding out where underground manmade cavities are the hard way. Not just basements but sewer systems could mission kill a mech if it falls through.
>>64617851My take on the AC is that the AC10 is approx. like the M1A1's main gun, and the AC20 is something like the Thumper (if it's a single-barrel design, otherwise it's anything that has a similar effect on target)A slight correction is needed on the MGs: they deal bonus/crit damage to unarmored targets *which includes armored targets you cracked open*. MGs exist as a matter of definition as the fastest DPS way to kill a cored mech.>>64620892I tend to ignore anything past the 1st Inner Sphere invasion of Clan territory. The Blake arc is absolutely idiotic even by the standards of books written for children
>>64613101if you givev' em non tabletop realistic weapon/sensor range, i can see them strafing enemy lines. for those who can make bipedal weapon platforms with fusion reactors, drone/missile defense systems should be no problem.
>>64615452this anon gets it
What do you think a realistic AFV with battletech technology would look like?I figure it would be a gigantic tank with parallel tiny fusion engines since the smaller the fusion engine the exponentially more efficient it is power/wt wise. These would power myomer which turns crankshafts for wheeled or tread propulsion.Its main armament would be quasi metal storm arrays of hundreds of machineguns.
>>64623962Do you mean in caliber or in total damage? Because even the most optimistic scaling (a German 88mm WW2 gun statted as a medium rifle) puts a modern tank gun south of an AC10, with a heavy rifle only doing 6 damage to mech armor.
>>64613228Smaller is better.
>>64613823There's actually a few Lance builds that simply can't deal with an AC/2 on a mobile enough Damn thing just keeps backing up faster than the Lance can charge it down.
>>64613101Winning the next Christmas truce soccer game by a country mile. That's what mechs are for.
>>64613101Bump
>>64623962>The Blake arc is absolutely idiotic even by the standards of books written for childrenI only know of the WOBs from Technical Readouts (which is all I've bought except for a single copy of Interstellar Operations for Superheavy Mech, LAM, and QuadVee construction, and even then, I could approximate most of the weights from TRO examples).I liked out the WOB made LAMs, despite their limited applications; LAMs I made were for conducting EW - Beagle/Bloodhound active probes, ECCM, TAG, and smoke LRMs for artillery and airstrikes from dedicated assets.
>>64623962For me things really start getting off the rails with the jihad
>>64626152>I only know of the WOBs from Technical ReadoutsJihad was basically "what if a real proper intergalactic WW3 hit Star Trek and every single character from every canon series was in it and they all fucking died", it was glorious, sad, stupid, and a send-off
Here's your mech brohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wm0bO-Szfn8
>>64613101bump
>>64613228>Goldilocks zone where they reduce the lethal radius of explosives exponentiallyThe height standoff also protects against mines and surface explosions like the V-hull MRAPs benefit from being tall.Being prone and having uneven ground provide actual cover from a "nearby" explosion or fragmentation is of course best, but we're talking vehicles that don't have that option. Also supersonic missiles do not have any incoming noise to warn you to take cover.
>>64613818>The BMP would accommodate 30% of ameriburgersI am actually very glad the Bradley isn't smaller, if you've been inside one you might agree.
>>64614165>>64613718The whole armor thing is that a mech leg and limbs are durable metal foam bones and the myomer that moves it is similarly tolerant of damage so the structural components themselves don't need much armor and can function despite being fully penetrated. The fusion reactor and crew compartment is the only part that needs actual armor and mech cockpits are rather small compared to a tank or apc interior (cyclops, atlas and other luxury mechs excluded.)The point is that the armor surface area on a 1 crew mech can be smaller than a larger crewed vehicle.>but what about Armata in their 3 crew pod in the ass of the tank and an unmanned turretYeah
