Battletech Vs. Star Trek

[Vejut]

See first part of thread before jacking by the eternal Mecha/tank war for opinion on that: BT guns have comparable power to phasers, quite possibly longer range, and CIWS (which MAY work on pho torps. Then again, it may not). On the other hand, Starfleet has more total vessels (though we don't know those are all capitol ships: at least one ep of ST has fighters included in the ship count, IIRC, whereas only WarShips are counted in BT)

Starfleet is slower at FTL [even over more than one jump), but can use it more (though we don't know about tactical FTL)

There is also the fact Straha is talking about sending the entirety of Clan Snow Raven, the largest Naval Power in the BT universe (with approximately 40 War Ships of varying sizes, and most of the clans naval production), against a fed outpost (if I read the initial post right...a fleet gathering of 40 ships is a big thing in ST. Of course, so is 40 warships in one place in Battletech.), which also would tilt the balance towards BT (it's not exactly FAIR, but it IS how he wrote the scenario).

[The Yosemite Bear]

Well from my point of view, lets just look at Word of Blake in Star Trek, they are a bunch of evil, religious nut jobs, that want to bring about the end of Civilization as either universe knows it.

They are effective enough with their cells, and Starfleet is lax enough with their security, they would probably figure out how to create some sort of subspace come power overload that would knock out every single federation ship through their communications grid....

Considerign the techoreliability of Startrek that's not inconcievable.

[Slacker]

Well from my point of view, lets just look at Word of Blake in Star Trek, they are a bunch of evil, religious nut jobs, that want to bring about the end of Civilization as either universe knows it.

They are effective enough with their cells, and Starfleet is lax enough with their security, they would probably figure out how to create some sort of subspace come power overload that would knock out every single federation ship through their communications grid....

Considerign the techoreliability of Startrek that's not inconcievable.

Well, if we're going to go covert ops, then Word of Blake would hardly be neccesary. MIIO, ISF, and Loki would probably give Imperial Security kittens, what with seven hundred odd years of working against each other. Hell, SAFE and the Mask could probably cause problems for the Federation, and they're distinctly second rate compared the other three Great Houses, let alone either flavor of ROM.

[Straha]

Well, if we're going to go covert ops, then Word of Blake would hardly be neccesary. MIIO, ISF, and Loki would probably give Imperial Security kittens, what with seven hundred odd years of working against each other. Hell, SAFE and the Mask could probably cause problems for the Federation, and they're distinctly second rate compared the other three Great Houses, let alone either flavor of ROM.

Well you completly ignored the Nekamaki (sp?) those people could defeat almost any security system anywhere.

But your ignoring the fact that the Clans barely have a intelligence source to speak of. They were out done by the Inner Sphere numerous times to my recolection. Let it stand at that.

[Slacker]

Well, I lumped the Spirit Cats in with the ISF. Die hard FedCommer, still think of the Snakes as no good some of the time.

As for the Clanners, the only good Clanner is a dead one. I didn't mention their special forces because they have none to speak of, although Kael Pershaw running something like MIIO, and understanding how it worked from the beginning, would be something to see. The Falcon Watch almost-emphasis on the almost part-got up to something like SAFE or MIM (Magistracy of Canopus) standards by 3067.

On the other hand, an Elemental would fold a Klingon in half, so I suppose you win some and you lose some. It causes me no end of amusement to think what a star of Elementals would do to the inside of a Borg Cube.

[beyond hope]

The Feds are going to have the speed advantage here, thanks to the acceleration compensators that keep them from being smeared into a paste under high acceleration. Photon and quantum torpedoes will also be a real problem, and how well the Clan ships withstand them is going to be entirely dependant on how good the defensive weapons of Clan warships and their CAP of dropships and omnifighters is. Another problem for the Clanners is lack of shielding: their ships are taking permanent damage with every hit, while the Feds can hit and run to let their shields build back up again. Nonetheless, the Clan side does have some things going for them. From the sound of Straha's first post, the Feddies are on the defensive: they have to stop the Clan warships from reaching whatever world they're attacking because once the mechs and battlearmor hit the ground the fight is *over* there. Clan warships also mount naval autocannons and gauss cannons as their primary armament: physical impacts are what Fed ships seem to have the toughest time coping with.

In a campaign, the Clans would be screwed. Not only does the Federation have more ships, but Clan warships don't have shields and have a lot of projectile weapons that are going to deplete their ammunition quickly. They'd have to get replicators figured out really damn quick, because there's no way they're going to set up the necessary infrastructure to make replacement parts and munitions in the AQ fast enough to repel the inevitable Fed counter-attack. Once the fleet is wiped out, the Clanners are isolated on whatever worlds they've taken and the Feddies have all the time in the world to dig them out again.

P.S.- I favor Ghost Bear, myself

[Typhonis 1]

hmmm if they set up in an out of the way spot they culd take there time to learn things..hire out as mercs if need be

[beyond hope]

With the Inner Sphere, that would work: some of the most elite units are mercenary companies to begin with and would already know the ins and outs.

A Clanner (except maybe the Diamond Sharks) would strangle the person who suggested it with their own entrails.

[Coalition]

Of course, then there's just the plain absurd, like the fact that 29.62 tons of diatomic hydrogen fuel being sufficent to accelerate a 2.4 million ton dreadnought at 1 gee for a full 24 hours, but *eh*.

That came from the Battlespace rules. The fuel table (using efficient thrust, not military thrust) is:

5,500 - 49,000 tons require 2.82 tons/burn-day
50,000 - 99,000 tons require 9.77 tons/burn-day
100,000 - 199,000 tons require 19.75 tons/burn-day
200,000 + tons require 39.52 tons/burn-day

So as you can see, the fuel table needs to be "extended".

The only real way for Battletech to stand a chance is to get in touch with the Maquis, and hire themselves out as ground combat specialists. The Maqui would provide tech upgrades, interstellar transportation, and the BT forces would do wonders in ground combat, and common sense.

(daydreams of what the "Siege of AR-558" would have been like if BT forces had been defending against the Jem'Hadar charge.) :-)

* Personal nitpick - the artillery weapons seem oversized for the models used. Would a 30 ton artillery weapon, plus ammo (200 kilos per shot) require 3 separate vehicles to transport and set up for firing? Also, what would be the official range of such a weapon?

[beyond hope]

Like the tanks, Battletech artillery was deliberately made weak so it wouldn't overpower mechs. Ironic in light of how often artillery is the preferred deus ex machina in the books for dealing with the Clans.

[Sea Skimmer]

* Personal nitpick - the artillery weapons seem oversized for the models used. Would a 30 ton artillery weapon, plus ammo (200 kilos per shot) require 3 separate vehicles to transport and set up for firing? Also, what would be the official range of such a weapon?

That would be quite large piece of artillery, 220-240mm or so give the shell weight. However the US built a 240mm self-propelled howitzer in 1945, weight was around 58 metric tons. Building a turret less 240mm howitzer on 30 ton's is probably possibul, though 35ish is more likely. There's also Atomic Anni, which was a full sized gun of 280mm, and it was 42 metric tons.

All of these would need a truck or APC for the crew, and another for every 10-20 rounds of ammo, but they won't be caring any parts of the gun.

[Sea Skimmer]

I forgot to add. There was a towed 240mm howitzer in US service in WW2, the M1. It entered service in 1943. It did need multiple vehicles, one for the gun and one for the cradle. However gun and chassis technology has advanced a damn lot since 1943, and the M1 was an update of a 1920 weapon, which was an update of British WW1 gun. So it wasn't even the best the period could have offered had the US started from scratch.

Battletech is full of crap. The longest-range weapon can only reach out 20,000 meters IIRC. You could very easily build a self propelled weapon that could reach out that far with a 200 kilo shell that could get into action in a couple minutes at most. No assemble would be required just digging in recoil spades, probably.

[Typhonis 1]

hmm IS battle armor would work as well ....be a very nasty shock to the Feddies...also in Mechwarrior they do have grenades something the Federation doesnt have

[Slacker]

Like the tanks, Battletech artillery was deliberately made weak so it wouldn't overpower mechs. Ironic in light of how often artillery is the preferred deus ex machina in the books for dealing with the Clans.

I take it you've never been on the recieving end of some loving by competently deployed Long Tom or Arrow IV fire, then.

As for the arty models, I think they're set up like that for one reason-they look cool. There are a few Arrow IV platforms that're more or less artillery tanks, so obviously it's not strictly neccesary.

[beyond hope]

Like the tanks, Battletech artillery was deliberately made weak so it wouldn't overpower mechs. Ironic in light of how often artillery is the preferred deus ex machina in the books for dealing with the Clans.

I take it you've never been on the recieving end of some loving by competently deployed Long Tom or Arrow IV fire, then.

As for the arty models, I think they're set up like that for one reason-they look cool. There are a few Arrow IV platforms that're more or less artillery tanks, so obviously it's not strictly neccesary.

Actually I have, thank you very much. Arrow IV FASCAM mines in particular have given me fits in the past.

I quote the following from the Battletech suppliment Maximum Tech, page 43.

Traditionally, BattleTech artillery has never been much more than an unreliable supplement to other forces--BattleTech artillery weapons are relatively inaccurate, and successfully aiming them at the enemy can be nearly impossible because of the long flight times of artillery shells.
The following rules are designed to bring the accuracy and performance of BattleTech artillery closer to the accuracy and performance of modern artillery....

(all incidences of boldface type appear in the original text.)

In other words, just as I stated, artillery in Battletech is deliberately less accurate than 20th century artillery to make Mechs more effective. Hence the source of my comment on it. The point being made in the thread was that a 30-ton artillery piece should be able to fire a shell a *lot* further than the 20 mapsheets a Long Tom artillery piece is good for, and with more accuracy using 20th century technology.

In short, bite me.