Battletech technical archive

[PainRack]

Over at Mercedes Fall, you can find mermaids-real, live, biologically engineered half-Human/half-fish people.

Accessory The Periphery.

This letter was apparently published in 2547, back when the treaty accords for the nascent SL was being forged.

And out in the periphery, in the Magistracy of Canopus. Without any R&D abilities of their own, this biotech must have been from the IS or at best, restricted to the Terran Hegemony which had exclusive control over various military technologies.

One wonders how the Clan genetech had improved from the Hegemony era.

On one hand, we do know that the SLDF was able to engineer animals to live on Eden,Babylon and other cluster worlds within a single human generation, with examples like the Smoke Jaguar being viable less than a decade after landfall. The Elemental program was also achieved within a single human lifespan.

On the other, Clan Smoke Jaguar did not have the ability to create a new genotype for their specialised protomech, relying instead on their aerospace warrior genetype.

[PainRack]

If it wasn't for the automated fire and forget programs he salvaged from Dastardly Dan's old Wasp, why he'd never have survived this long as a peace officer. Now, don't get me wrong. The Marshal is a good man and a good mechwarrior, but he's got only one machine and five hundred square kilometers of trigger-happy ranchers and settlers who shoot first and ask questions later.

In response, Yoguchi Kurita himself devised a system of bad-weather combat in which pairs of light mechs would engage a single heavy Mech, while another Mech would lay down covering fire to prevent another heavy enemy Mech from coming to the rescue.

Because pirates attacks usually depend on the element of surprise, bandits often strike at night. With the aid of heat-seeking weapons, they can zero in on targets, such as power stations or factories, that might otherwise be hidden by conventional camoflague.

Acessory The Periphery.

[PainRack]

Nebfer brought this to my attention, regarding a post at CBT about the new rulebook coming out.

At the very beginning of the Playing the Game chapter is a note on scale, where for the first time it is specified that the weapons ranges are truncated for gameplay purposes and do not reflect actual "in-universe" weapon ranges. While irrelevant to gameplay, I found touches like these to be a nice addition to Total Warfare and the Battletech product line as a whole.

[Hotfoot]

That's a nice touch, and while it's good that they're trying to update the game from the horrid morass of silly things that plagued it in previous editions, they still don't have any real measurements of what the real ranges should be - and frankly, in a hex-based tabletop game, there's no real reason why you can't have the real ranges and still have good gameplay. Part of the reason for hex-based games was to add realism to tabletop games.

Unfortunately, I don't think it goes far enough. A friend of mine was at GenCon, and reported back that nothing major has changed, fluff-wise or rules-wise, that helps to improve the consistancy or realism of the system. So we still have cardboard-burning lasers, water cannon AC/20's, and, well, vapor-shooting machine guns.

I'd also like to note that while this is quite an impressive project in your dedication to it, I have to admit I find it ultimately rather pointless. Since we don't have a clear line of Canon in Battletech, there's no way to tell which information trumps other information. In Star Wars, it's clear, Movie > Novelization > EU/Comics > Games. In Battletech, novels contradict each other, rulebooks provide contradictory information even in the same edition, it's just a big mess.

The sad truth is that this most recent piece of information is the most relevant thing you've posted in this entire thread, because the only real canon changes that we can track are between the editions. Everything else can easily be countered by another quote from another source of equal level canon. While cherry picking the most favorable data is beneficial towards creating a better picture of what Battletech should be like, it's not a wholly accurate image of what it actually is like.

If FanPro finally sits down and writes up a more sensible and streamlined version of battletech, it may finally be useful in versus discussions, but even now, it's still pretty hard to place it's relative power with any serious analysis. However, the chances of them doing that seem slim to none, since the fans simply want slightly modified versions of the original game.

[PainRack]

That's a nice touch, and while it's good that they're trying to update the game from the horrid morass of silly things that plagued it in previous editions, they still don't have any real measurements of what the real ranges should be - and frankly, in a hex-based tabletop game, there's no real reason why you can't have the real ranges and still have good gameplay. Part of the reason for hex-based games was to add realism to tabletop games.

???? Insofar as I know, the "realism" in tabletop games comes from non hexed based maps, similar to those used in WH40k. Its interesting to note that Battletech itself has a variant played on this, although for ease of simplicity, most games still take place on traditional maps.

Unfortunately, I don't think it goes far enough. A friend of mine was at GenCon, and reported back that nothing major has changed, fluff-wise or rules-wise, that helps to improve the consistancy or realism of the system. So we still have cardboard-burning lasers, water cannon AC/20's, and, well, vapor-shooting machine guns.

You know, we been through this before. This argument of "weakness" arises solely from a non technical examination of Battletech, as well as quoting various novel quotes that in comparison to the bulk of evidence, can be considered as outlier points. Indeed, the only real "problem" would be the wham bang exploding mek reactor, in which game fluff explictly states that the novel fluff is wrong, mech reactors do not go boom unless the mechwarriors deliberately sucides and set his reactor to overload.Reactors overheating merely result in the loss of power and an emergency restart.

I'd also like to note that while this is quite an impressive project in your dedication to it, I have to admit I find it ultimately rather pointless. Since we don't have a clear line of Canon in Battletech, there's no way to tell which information trumps other information. In Star Wars, it's clear, Movie > Novelization > EU/Comics > Games. In Battletech, novels contradict each other, rulebooks provide contradictory information even in the same edition, it's just a big mess.

That is nothing new. Apart from the big movie/tv science fiction franchises,most other science fiction universes are unclear to canonicity, especially game based universes. Starcraft is a relatively good example.

However, we do have an idea of canonicity and in terms of technical details, it has been said that game fluff> all, or I should state that Fanpro takes this stand. The problem solely rests in whether novel fluff>>> game mechanics.

The sad truth is that this most recent piece of information is the most relevant thing you've posted in this entire thread, because the only real canon changes that we can track are between the editions. Everything else can easily be countered by another quote from another source of equal level canon. While cherry picking the most favorable data is beneficial towards creating a better picture of what Battletech should be like, it's not a wholly accurate image of what it actually is like.

Oh? Pray tell where have I cherry picked ANY data.

I have consistently taken data from the HIGHEST canon source available, that is, game fluff. While I have posted the novel source about laser rifles, I have also noted that this is an outlier position in prior threads.

I have consistently used the updated Errata, so as to include the updated information used. I have posted information deleterious to battletech, in particular the Conventry Artillery.

You sir, are arguing from a biased position. Since this thread is meant for pure technical discussion, I refuse to address any of your bias from here hence forth.

If you wish to post technical discussion, in particular, "cardboard" lasers and the like, feel free to do so.

SOD merely requires one to build an internally consistent universe, it does not require one to build a distorted one. That is the purpose of this thread and any technical/political discussion I have talked about Btech. I have never taken a maximalist position. While I have chosen to override information based on game fluff, I do this purely because canonicity states that game fluff> mechanics.

[Hotfoot]

???? Insofar as I know, the "realism" in tabletop games comes from non hexed based maps, similar to those used in WH40k. Its interesting to note that Battletech itself has a variant played on this, although for ease of simplicity, most games still take place on traditional maps.

WH40K states quite clearly that the ranges on the tabletop game are not the actual ranges of the weapons. However we have been able to get much better numbers from the fluff of WH40k than we have from BTech. With a hex map, you can easily abstract distances, and nothing is considered to be "scale". Every hex could easily be 500 meters and the game would not really suffer adversely from that fact. You can also easily stack units in the same hex if it would make sense to do so.

You know, we been through this before. This argument of "weakness" arises solely from a non technical examination of Battletech, as well as quoting various novel quotes that in comparison to the bulk of evidence, can be considered as outlier points. Indeed, the only real "problem" would be the wham bang exploding mek reactor, in which game fluff explictly states that the novel fluff is wrong, mech reactors do not go boom unless the mechwarriors deliberately sucides and set his reactor to overload.Reactors overheating merely result in the loss of power and an emergency restart.

Yes, we have been through it before, and every time I bring it up you quietly slink away, only to post in this thread a few months later. I am frankly appalled that you consider the analysis of round density to be "non technical". It's sure as shooting more technical than cherry-picking data that supports your argument while clapping your hands over your ears ignoring the stuff that destroys it. But then you didn't even bother to attack the arguments of water cannon AC/20's and vapor spewing machineguns that destroy armor that supposedly could resist a MBT's main cannon without a scratch is just plain silly. Or the idea that a 114kg projectile at Mach 5.5 could hit a mech, bounce off the armor, and leave the mech standing is even sillier.

That is nothing new. Apart from the big movie/tv science fiction franchises,most other science fiction universes are unclear to canonicity, especially game based universes. Starcraft is a relatively good example.

In Starcraft, at the very least, one can refer to the cutscenes and the novels for better information. However, the fluff in BTech and the Novels all tend to contradict each other, so there is no clear line of canon to choose from. When one book says that a laser had to be overpowered to light a wooden house on fire, and another one says that a glancing hit incinerated a tree, you can't pick and choose whichever one suits you best, no matter how much you'd like to. The best you can do is assign an upper and lower limit and hope for the best.

However, we do have an idea of canonicity and in terms of technical details, it has been said that game fluff> all, or I should state that Fanpro takes this stand. The problem solely rests in whether novel fluff>>> game mechanics.

And of course, if a novel was written using game mechanics as a limit for what could be done, it rather screws the pooch on the whole thing.

Oh? Pray tell where have I cherry picked ANY data.

ALL of it. Tell me, where have you posted a quote stating the LOW end of the spectrum? Low ranges that we would see in the game mechanics, lasers barely able to burn through cardboard, missiles with anemic payloads, cannons with low recoil, and all that stuff? Nope, it's all been the best, high-end information you could find. That is what we call "cherry picking". If you intended this thread to find the high and low ends of Battletech for a clear and complete analysis of the setting, you have failed.

I have consistently taken data from the HIGHEST canon source available, that is, game fluff. While I have posted the novel source about laser rifles, I have also noted that this is an outlier position in prior threads.

I have consistently used the updated Errata, so as to include the updated information used. I have posted information deleterious to battletech, in particular the Conventry Artillery.

You sir, are arguing from a biased position. Since this thread is meant for pure technical discussion, I refuse to address any of your bias from here hence forth.

Wah wah wah! I don't like that you're calling me on my bullshit so I'm not talking to you anymore, you big meanie!

I call 'em like I see 'em. If you don't like it, too bad.

If you wish to post technical discussion, in particular, cardboard" lasers and the like, feel free to do so.

SOD merely requires one to build an internally consistent universe, it does not require one to build a distorted one. That is the purpose of this thread and any technical/political discussion I have talked about Btech. I have never taken a maximalist position. While I have chosen to override information based on game fluff, I do this purely because canonicity states that game fluff> mechanics.

Every equation I have done on this subject includes a high end and a low end, and neither set is terribly flattering to BTech, and only shows how the creators and the writers never gave any thought to back of the envelope calculations.

Remember, however, that SOD also requires that we use what the writers give us, and follow the line of canon. There is no clear line of canon in BTech, and a lot of what the writers give us is crap (re: Mackie Trial). There is literally no way to reconcile the following:

-Merkava Main Cannon doing no damage to old 'Mech armor
-AC/20's causing 'Mechs tremendous damage and causing them to fall over
-Gauss Rifles causing less damage than AC/20's, not causing knockdown or knockback (remember, 114kg accelerates a 100-ton mech over 200kph).
-~20mm MG arrays eating up armor that could not be scratched by a much larger weapon
-"Missiles" that are glorified rockets that get by on numbers instead of increased payloads

And of course, there's still no real reason that Tanks should be left to the wayside, save for the "ZOMG 'Mechs" part of the game, but that's an entire thread on its own.

Oh, and as for bias, guess what sparky? Doesn't matter. You can't ignore my arguments or my data by screaming "ZOMG BIAS". Deal with it.

But hey, because you asked for my own technical data, here it is, again. This is largely cut-and-pasted because I don't feel an overwhelming need to make it look prettier, and it's all been done before:

Assuming a mere 10% of the total mass of an ammo box in BTech consists of loading mechanisms and structure, we're still left with the fact that less than 50% of the shells are, in fact, the projectile. Using the caseless ammunition as a model, removing the cases from the equation reduces mass and size enough to fit twice as much ammo in the box with no change in mass. Add to that the fact that there still has to be significant powder charge behind the projectile, and, well. Assuming another mere 10% remaining mass in powder, that leaves the projectile with
1000*0.9 = 900 (total mass of projectiles after removing loading gear)
900/2 = 450 (total mass of projectiles after removing casing)
450/5 = 90 (total mass of one "burst")
90*0.9 = 81 (total mass of one "burst" after removing propellant)
81/10 = 8.1 (total mass of a single projectile)

8.1 kg for a single, 200mm projectile. Take in mind this is assuming only 5% of the mass of the total shell is made up of propellant.

Assuming this is a 200mm cube (which it's not, but makes for an easier analysis, and is generous to the BTech side as a shell would tend to be much longer than it is wide), this gives us a density of 1012.5 kg/m^3. Right between water and sea water (1000 and 1025, respectively).

Even assuming 100% of each shell's mass is included in the projectile, this gives us 20kg to work with. The density of the projectile is 2500 kg/m^2. This is slightly less dense than aluminum. Iron has a density of 7870.

Assuming one shot instead of a burst, but still assuming we lose weight for reasonable purposes gives us 81kg. This gives the cube a density of 10125 kg/m^3. This is much more reasonable, and gives us a density which is considerably greater than iron, but still less than that of silver (or lead).

Assuming one shot of the full 200kg, we have a density of 25000 kg/m^3, which is denser than the most dense than iridium (which is far denser than Uranium).

Take in mind, of course, that these densities are all greater than what would normally be expected from a properly shaped shell. If the first example is true, that's a pretty bad sign.

By the way, AC/2 rounds, assuming 50mm is the average, work out as such:
Maximum value:
1000/45 = 22.2
22.2/10 = 2.22
2.22/0.05^3 = 17760 (a good number, but assumes 100% of the shell, including casing, loading mechanism, and propellent are included in the mass)

Realistic value, having removed shell casing and minimal mass for propellant:
1000*0.9 = 900
900/45 = 20
20/2 = 10
10*0.9 = 9
9/10 = 0.9
0.9/0.05^3 = 7200 (not bad, but still lower than iron)

Let's assume, again, that we have 20mmx20mmx20mm shells. Yeah, I know, not realistic, but it saves time, and as we all know, rounds like this are longer than they are wide, so this tends to be a generous comparison. You have stated in the past that the MG fires 48 rounds in a burst. One ton of ammunition is 200 "bursts", half a ton being 100 "bursts".

500kg = 100*48 = 4,800
500kg/4800=~0.1042kg=104.2g

That's the entire round, including feed mechanism, ammo box, shell casing, and powder charge. Using the values I've used in the past, let's see what the actual projectile comes out to.
So here we go:
104.2g*0.9=93.78g
93.78g/2=46.89g
46.89g*0.9=42.201g
42.2g, give or take, is what we end up with.

20mm = 0.02m (0.02^3=0.000008) and 42.2g = 0.0422kg. This gives us 0.0422kg/0.000008m^3 = 5275kg/m^3

That's between titanium and tin.

Maybe it's better if we shoot the whole thing, 104.2g? 0.1042kg/0.000008m^3 = 13025kg/m^3

Better, between Lead and Mercury.

Now, if, say, the round is more realistic, say, rounded, 20mm wide and 40mm long, say, what does that change?

pi*0.02^2=3.1416*0.0004=~0.00126m^2
0.00126*0.04=0.0000504m^3

0.0422kg/0.0000504m^3=~837.3kg/m^3

Whole thing:
0.1042kg/0.0000504m^3=~2067.46kg/m^3

We either have something slightly less dense than ice being fired, or something slightly more dense than magnesium.

Finally, I did a brief calculation of the high-end stats for a Gauss Rifle, using a 114kg slug fired at Mach 5.5. As you can see, it got more than a little crazy.

100,195,312,500 N
or 1*10^11

An inelastic collision with a 100 ton mech, well...
F/m=a
100,195,312,500/100000 = 1001953.125

2*1001953.125(0.002) = v^2
4007.8125 = v^2
v ~= 63 m/s
63m/s = 226.8 kph

Something that accelerates the heaviest mech to a speed faster than it can get to under its own power is not supposed to knock it over, yet the stream of water fired from an AC/20 does? Welcome to WTF-World.

[PainRack]

Yes, we have been through it before, and every time I bring it up you quietly slink away, only to post in this thread a few months later. I am frankly appalled that you consider the analysis of round density to be "non technical". It's sure as shooting more technical than cherry-picking data that supports your argument while clapping your hands over your ears ignoring the stuff that destroys it. But then you didn't even bother to attack the arguments of water cannon AC/20's and vapor spewing machineguns that destroy armor that supposedly could resist a MBT's main cannon without a scratch is just plain silly. Or the idea that a 114kg projectile at Mach 5.5 could hit a mech, bounce off the armor, and leave the mech standing is even sillier.

You mean other than the fact that we can measure effects?

I already stated that in order for Btech to be consistent, ballistic weaponery became over-specialised to defeat btech armour. The conclusion we reached were different.

you assumed that given higher deformation energy, the armour would buckle and collapse.

I showed that we already have incidents of higher ke seen, but the damage is not consistent. Meaning that not all of the energy is used to do work.

However, the fluff in BTech and the Novels all tend to contradict each other, so there is no clear line of canon to choose from. When one book says that a laser had to be overpowered to light a wooden house on fire, and another one says that a glancing hit incinerated a tree, you can't pick and choose whichever one suits you best, no matter how much you'd like to. The best you can do is assign an upper and lower limit and hope for the best.

So? The very same thing happens in SW where a proton torpedo salvo is required in I Jedi to destroy a Sith statue.

And I be glad for you to back that one BTW, because I don't have both examples that you allude to. I do have the pulse lasers reflect off rain, gauss rifle inconsistencies where it can dig a meter long trench in ferrorcrete vs its halted by a building walls.

Upper and lower limits are what we do in analysing scific.

And of course, if a novel was written using game mechanics as a limit for what could be done, it rather screws the pooch on the whole thing.

And? The game mechanics themselves are still suborned to game fluff.

Tell me, where have you posted a quote stating the LOW end of the spectrum? Low ranges that we would see in the game mechanics, lasers barely able to burn through cardboard, missiles with anemic payloads, cannons with low recoil, and all that stuff? Nope, it's all been the best, high-end information you could find. That is what we call "cherry picking". If you intended this thread to find the high and low ends of Battletech for a clear and complete analysis of the setting, you have failed.

You mean other than in the past where I had posted that LRMs do not contain enough HE to do any damage and damage must be via impact?
Or in other Btech related threads where I gripped that Btech infantry sucks or in this thread the lousy capabilities of Conventry artillery?

Oh wait! How about the very fact that I posted an upper limit to Clan warrior s? Yup. That's just TOTAL wankage. I mean, stating that the Clans warrior replacement upper limit is only 400 warriors a year and is likely to be even smaller is JUST WANKING.

But hey, you know where Dark Hellion is? Please go join him in the corner.

And of course, you would be so nice to note where have I posted "high" end calcs FOR lasers, missiles and autocannons in this thread. Other than a single rifle description in thread, which I posted because its a technical quote. Oh wait, you ignore that this thread was meant purely as a storage of technical quotes.

-Merkava Main Cannon doing no damage to old 'Mech armor
-AC/20's causing 'Mechs tremendous damage and causing them to fall over
-Gauss Rifles causing less damage than AC/20's, not causing knockdown or knockback (remember, 114kg accelerates a 100-ton mech over 200kph).
-~20mm MG arrays eating up armor that could not be scratched by a much larger weapon
-"Missiles" that are glorified rockets that get by on numbers instead of increased payloads

Whoopie. You mean other than the fucking fact that the armour theory covers this issue sufficiently? Of course, the reason why that isn't posted here is because armour is speculation, whereas this is technical quotes, but hey, don't let that stop you.

I'm so glad to see you dig up old issues and ignore the relevent rebuttals.

[Hotfoot]

You mean other than the fact that we can measure effects?

I already stated that in order for Btech to be consistent, ballistic weaponery became over-specialised to defeat btech armour. The conclusion we reached were different.

you assumed that given higher deformation energy, the armour would buckle and collapse.

I showed that we already have incidents of higher ke seen, but the damage is not consistent. Meaning that not all of the energy is used to do work.

There's a massive difference between being over-specialized to defeat BTech armor and having a density less that that of WATER. That's okay, I fully expected you not to grasp that.

So? The very same thing happens in SW where a proton torpedo salvo is required in I Jedi to destroy a Sith statue.

Oh but wait: you forgot one thing: Movie>Book>Comic>Game in Star Wars canon. All I have to do to trump that is find a case of a Proton Torpedo doing more damage and poof! That example might as well not exist.

By the way, given your history of selective quoting, any context to put that in? You know, something like the statue being made of Star Destroyer armor or being protected by the Force? Because I'd hate for someone else to come in and show that you misused a quote. Again.

And I be glad for you to back that one BTW, because I don't have both examples that you allude to. I do have the pulse lasers reflect off rain, gauss rifle inconsistencies where it can dig a meter long trench in ferrorcrete vs its halted by a building walls.

Upper and lower limits are what we do in analysing scific.

It's what we're supposed to do, at any rate. Of course, your vision of how that's supposed to work is horrifically skewed. I'll come back to that in a minute.

And? The game mechanics themselves are still suborned to game fluff.

This is what you don't grasp. When Game Fluff = Game Mechanics, now Game Mechanics = Game Fluff. MEANING that even if there are other bits of fluff out there, you can't easily seperate them. Need I remind you that you do not get to set canon policy. If there is a book where the fluff is directly based on game mechanics, there is no canon policy that says that it's any less canon than another book which doesn't.

You mean other than in the past where I had posted that LRMs do not contain enough HE to do any damage and damage must be via impact?
Or in other Btech related threads where I gripped that Btech infantry sucks or in this thread the lousy capabilities of Conventry artillery?

Oh wait! How about the very fact that I posted an upper limit to Clan warrior s? Yup. That's just TOTAL wankage. I mean, stating that the Clans warrior replacement upper limit is only 400 warriors a year and is likely to be even smaller is JUST WANKING.

Oh wow, like I give a shit about the reproducing tech of the clans. We're talking about the military technology of the universe and you know it. By the way, the LRM data is contradicted by the death of Ulric Kerensky, enjoy.

Meanwhile the suckage of BTech Infantry and Artillery is far more than you're willing to admit. Modern artillery blows Btech artillery away so easily it's not even funny.

But hey, you know where Dark Hellion is? Please go join him in the corner.

And of course, you would be so nice to note where have I posted "high" end calcs FOR lasers, missiles and autocannons in this thread. Other than a single rifle description in thread, which I posted because its a technical quote. Oh wait, you ignore that this thread was meant purely as a storage of technical quotes.

Sure it is. That's why on page one you started up your theorizing on the way the armor protects 'mechs. After all, it's just for storage of relevant quotes. Not meant for crazy theories or discussions, right?

Oh, wait. That's right, it was a discussion. Heck, let's use your own words, so you feel even MORE violated:

This is going to be an extended post and discussion.

This is with regards to the calibre of autocannons for different classes, armour protection and more importantly, range implications.

-Merkava Main Cannon doing no damage to old 'Mech armor
-AC/20's causing 'Mechs tremendous damage and causing them to fall over
-Gauss Rifles causing less damage than AC/20's, not causing knockdown or knockback (remember, 114kg accelerates a 100-ton mech over 200kph).
-~20mm MG arrays eating up armor that could not be scratched by a much larger weapon
-"Missiles" that are glorified rockets that get by on numbers instead of increased payloads

Whoopie. You mean other than the fucking fact that the armour theory covers this issue sufficiently? Of course, the reason why that isn't posted here is because armour is speculation, whereas this is technical quotes, but hey, don't let that stop you.

I'm so glad to see you dig up old issues and ignore the relevent rebuttals.

So your armor theory does the following adequately:
-Stops all damage from a single round, without even weakening
-Melts away to rounds of high enough speed regardless of their density
-Armor that stops the transfer of kinetic energy entirely, so that no matter how hard you hit it, it won't move back.

Bullshit. In your crazy world, 'Mechs wouldn't be able to move under their own power and would be annihilated by a rainstorm. You brought your lunatic armor theory to the thread, so it's fair game. The fact that you lack the mental acuity to deal with the numbers is not my problem. Weapons with the density of water or less tear apart this fancy armor that supposedly can take a single hit with relative ease. The Gauss Rifle doesn't knock down 'Mechs because it's never been shown to knock down 'Mechs, thus the lower limit must be set at the Gauss Rifle. Oh yeah, never mind that a water cannon can knock down a 'Mech while a supersonic slug with a massive amount of additional force can't.

Did you just not read the part about how a 114kg projectile fired at Mach 5.5 (a number you previously provided) can make a 100 ton mech go over 200kph IN ANY DIRECTION?

I mean, seriously, a gyro resists rotation, not lateral movement. Armor can't stop you from flying back. So what are these supposed rebuttals you've made? Is it something to the tune of "La La La I hate science La La La!", or did you make up some sort of new kinetic energy dampening field that's never been seen or mentioned anywhere in Btech to explain this away? Either way, IT DOESN'T WORK. Deal with it.

[PainRack]

There's a massive difference between being over-specialized to defeat BTech armor and having a density less that that of WATER. That's okay, I fully expected you not to grasp that.

That's ok. I perfectly expected you to ignore the fact that a higher KE impact does not lead to higher damage values also.

Oh but wait: you forgot one thing: Movie>Book>Comic>Game in Star Wars canon. All I have to do to trump that is find a case of a Proton Torpedo doing more damage and poof! That example might as well not exist.

Oh wait, there isn't. Its all found on the same canon levels, that is, C canon.

Wait: You mean you have to use the same methods use everywhere else, that is, to take the majority of evidence and to discard outlier values? My My! What a shocking discovery.

By the way, given your history of selective quoting, any context to put that in? You know, something like the statue being made of Star Destroyer armor or being protected by the Force? Because I'd hate for someone else to come in and show that you misused a quote. Again.

Right.................... I Jedi, Corran Horn unleashed a proton torpedo to take out a Sith statue, that was helping the Spirt of Exar kun. This= ISD armour.

This is what you don't grasp. When Game Fluff = Game Mechanics, now Game Mechanics = Game Fluff. MEANING that even if there are other bits of fluff out there, you can't easily seperate them. Need I remind you that you do not get to set canon policy. If there is a book where the fluff is directly based on game mechanics, there is no canon policy that says that it's any less canon than another book which doesn't.

So? The fact is, game fluff> game mechanics.

I'm not working to create a technical anaylsis of Btech to let it make sense. My goal is to create an internally consistent analysis of Btech. Of oft, this means discarding outlier values or to simply accept that various concepts of Btech violates physics and common sense.

Oh wow, like I give a shit about the reproducing tech of the clans. We're talking about the military technology of the universe and you know it. By the way, the LRM data is contradicted by the death of Ulric Kerensky, enjoy.

Meanwhile the suckage of BTech Infantry and Artillery is far more than you're willing to admit. Modern artillery blows Btech artillery away so easily it's not even funny.

Oh wow...... You're posting facts that I know, and have actually corrected others on when they claim that Btech infantry are superior. Wonderful job there.

Sure it is. That's why on page one you started up your theorizing on the way the armor protects 'mechs. After all, it's just for storage of relevant quotes. Not meant for crazy theories or discussions, right?

You mean the storage of quotes with regards to autocannon calibre and the discussion thereoff?

Oh wait, you ignored that I was talking about utter speculation, as opposed to quoting. Wonderful.

So your armor theory does the following adequately:
-Stops all damage from a single round, without even weakening
-Melts away to rounds of high enough speed regardless of their density
-Armor that stops the transfer of kinetic energy entirely, so that no matter how hard you hit it, it won't move back.

Wrong. But hey,its obvious you don't know what the armour theory is anyway.

It accepts that based on the internal consistency of Btech, despite the fact that it violates common physics(but hey, what science fiction story doesn't?), Btech armour has an unknown, unquantifiable resistance to KE attacks. We are only able to qualitatively say that damage to Btech armour is based on the mass impactor and any quantitative analysis of the energies is impossible.

THAT is the armour theory. The theory that Btech armour has an ability that means available KE isn't a working model for armour penetration/damage, but rather, mass/momentum is.

The second component of the Btech armour theory is that Btech armour has the ability to absorb and radiate energies away from the impact site, spreading it over a much larger surface area, based on how energy weapons damage takes effect.

So, since you insist on this, let me repeat.

Btech armour theory= Armour damage is based on mass, not KE. Resistance to KE= impossible to use KE to model damage.

Laser energy is absorbed, spread, radiated away from impact site.

[Hotfoot]

That's ok. I perfectly expected you to ignore the fact that a higher KE impact does not lead to higher damage values also.

You don't seem to understand at all. If I turn a fucking fire hose on a tank, it doesn't melt away. According to Battletech, a 'Mech will. Fuck man, a god damn air pump can knock off armor. A STRONG WIND WILL KILL A MECH. DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THIS?

Oh wait, there isn't. Its all found on the same canon levels, that is, C canon.

Wait, what's that? A torpedo from an older fighter gutted the inside of a ship on movie-level? Oh, so sorry, go fuck yourself. Oh wait, what's that? Using the whole quote in context still beyond you? Oh, okay, I guess I'll have to go get the book and see if you omitted anything. AGAIN.

Wait: You mean you have to use the same methods use everywhere else, that is, to take the majority of evidence and to discard outlier values? My My! What a shocking discovery.

Guess what? My calcs aren't based on outliers, asshole. They're using the most commonly accepted numbers. Deal with it.

By the way, given your history of selective quoting, any context to put that in? You know, something like the statue being made of Star Destroyer armor or being protected by the Force? Because I'd hate for someone else to come in and show that you misused a quote. Again.

Right.................... I Jedi, Corran Horn unleashed a proton torpedo to take out a Sith statue, that was helping the Spirt of Exar kun. This= ISD armour.

Oh this gets better. Not only do you selectively pull material from books, but from posts too! I bet if I push this any further, it will whittle down from a barrage of proton torpedos that only just destroyed the statue, to a single photon torpedo that obliterated it. Go on, provide the full quote, asshole. Let's see how far this fucking rabbit hole goes.

So? The fact is, game fluff> game mechanics.

I'm not working to create a technical anaylsis of Btech to let it make sense. My goal is to create an internally consistent analysis of Btech. Of oft, this means discarding outlier values or to simply accept that various concepts of Btech violates physics and common sense.

I know math isn't your strong suit, so I'll make this as easy as I can. When game mechanics = game fluff, game fluff !> game mechanics. Just so this doesn't seem like a nitpick, allow me to extrapolate. If I have a book that was based entirely on game mechanics, down the ranges, armor lost, and so on, and it was written after a book you've used as a source for longer ranges, better weapons, better armor, or whatever, you can't simply ignore it because you don't like it. After that, the burden of proof is on you to show that the example you have is, in fact, the norm, instead of being an outlier. This means actually going and counting the number of books with values you don't want and comparing them to the number of books with the values you do want. I know, it's math, but you talked yourself into it bucko. Luckily for you, it's simple addition.

Oh wow...... You're posting facts that I know, and have actually corrected others on when they claim that Btech infantry are superior. Wonderful job there.

In my previous discussions with you, you've not shown a very clear connection with reality when it comes to admitting just how bad the artillery is, so I just want to hammer home the point. But hey, bad infantry? What about the Gray Death Legion?

You mean the storage of quotes with regards to autocannon calibre and the discussion thereoff?

Oh wait, you ignored that I was talking about utter speculation, as opposed to quoting. Wonderful.

Now you're selectively quoting YOURSELF! How far does this go? When you were in school, did you manage to convince yourself you passed reading comprehension by imaging the report card said "Painrack got an A!" instead of "Painrack got so many things out of context, an elephant could do a better job of figuring out human speech."

But hey, I guess "Discussion" means whatever you want it to mean, right?

So your armor theory does the following adequately:
-Stops all damage from a single round, without even weakening
-Melts away to rounds of high enough speed regardless of their density
-Armor that stops the transfer of kinetic energy entirely, so that no matter how hard you hit it, it won't move back.

Wrong. But hey,its obvious you don't know what the armour theory is anyway.

It accepts that based on the internal consistency of Btech, despite the fact that it violates common physics(but hey, what science fiction story doesn't?), Btech armour has an unknown, unquantifiable resistance to KE attacks. We are only able to qualitatively say that damage to Btech armour is based on the mass impactor and any quantitative analysis of the energies is impossible.

THAT is the armour theory. The theory that Btech armour has an ability that means available KE isn't a working model for armour penetration/damage, but rather, mass/momentum is.

The second component of the Btech armour theory is that Btech armour has the ability to absorb and radiate energies away from the impact site, spreading it over a much larger surface area, based on how energy weapons damage takes effect.

So, since you insist on this, let me repeat.

Btech armour theory= Armour damage is based on mass, not KE. Resistance to KE= impossible to use KE to model damage.

Laser energy is absorbed, spread, radiated away from impact site.

Magic. Right. Nice science there. Really, I mean it. In no way have you completely ignored contradictory evidence that would demolish your point.

Did I mention that the collision calculation with the Gauss Cannon doesn't require there to be a small point of impact? It doesn't matter. The 100 ton mech is thrown back at a speed of over 200kph. Your armor theory doesn't change the fact that a bad storm would melt away a 'Mech according to that same model, or that the 'Mech wouldn't be able to move because it would wear away its legs with every step it took.

Never mind that at no point is this magical unobtanium armor component EVER MENTIONED ANYWHERE IN THE CANON OF BATTLETECH, AND IT IS ENTIRELY A FABRICATION OF YOUR OWN MIND.

See, most sci-fi, when it breaks the laws of physics, doesn't go into huge amounts of detail about how it does, because very few people want to hear it, and it can date the sci-fi. When you go into the tremendous detail that Battletech has into explaining how things work, you run the risk of it not making sense when you look closely at it. That is what has happened here. There is literally no way to reconcile the inconsistancies here unless you completely rewrite Battletech canon. As I said earlier, it's good that FanPro has started this process, but unless they change the line so much that it becomes nigh-unrecognizable to die-hard fans, they won't succeed, so intrenched is the problem.

I don't see why you want to keep doing this. Battletech is already pretty damn close to the bottom of the ladder for vs. debates even if you ignore the most glaring issues. With those issues, it becomes almost impossible to take seriously in any extrauniversal context. The only way Battletech can seriously be used at this point is internally with using game mechanics/fluff without thinking too hard about what would really happen.

[PainRack]

The front-line galaxies still contain Battlemechs, through Omnimechs replace them as soon as they become available. Taking into account increased factory production and a conservative estimate of salvage and isorla likely to be taken in the near future, Alpha and Beta Galaxies should be fully equipped with OmniMechs within a year. Gamma and Delta Galaxies should be fully equipped with Omnimechs less than a year after that. Within the year Clan Wolf also expects to field two full Garrison Galaxies, with a third the following year. The renewal of the invasion and the capture of Inner Sphere machines and resources will speed up the process.

Field Manual Crusader Clans, Clan Wolf.

As an estimate, Clan Wolf ability to replenish Omnimechs in her frontline forces in an entire year= 45 Omnimechs a year.(Counting battlemech forces in Alpha and Beta Galaxy, with a slight elaboration due to the fact that a Trinary consists of mixed battlemech and fighters, which in this case has been counted entirely as battlemechs.)

While this estimate ignores Omnimechs assigned to training and cadre forces, as well as omnimechs that may have been used to replace losses and the Touman(which may have been factored into the estimate quoted), it should nevertheless serve as a rough gauge of Omnimech factory production. This is even more telling since in the rebuilding estimate, isorla and salvage was factored in, thus adequately compensating for any Omnimechs assigned to other tasks.

A more generous estimate(assuming that all mechs not stated as Omnimechs are battlemechs) only changes the rate to 195 Omnimechs a year. This utterly represents the upper limit of Omnimech production, seeing as it estimates that all Trinaries not explictly stated to be Omnimechs are battlemechs, and that all such units are battlemechs as opposed to auxillary forces like Elementals and fighters.

[consequences]

The front-line galaxies still contain Battlemechs, through Omnimechs replace them as soon as they become available. Taking into account increased factory production and a conservative estimate of salvage and isorla likely to be taken in the near future, Alpha and Beta Galaxies should be fully equipped with OmniMechs within a year. Gamma and Delta Galaxies should be fully equipped with Omnimechs less than a year after that. Within the year Clan Wolf also expects to field two full Garrison Galaxies, with a third the following year. The renewal of the invasion and the capture of Inner Sphere machines and resources will speed up the process.

Field Manual Crusader Clans, Clan Wolf.

As an estimate, Clan Wolf ability to replenish Omnimechs in her frontline forces in an entire year= 45 Omnimechs a year.(Counting battlemech forces in Alpha and Beta Galaxy, with a slight elaboration due to the fact that a Trinary consists of mixed battlemech and fighters, which in this case has been counted entirely as battlemechs.)

While this estimate ignores Omnimechs assigned to training and cadre forces, as well as omnimechs that may have been used to replace losses and the Touman(which may have been factored into the estimate quoted), it should nevertheless serve as a rough gauge of Omnimech factory production. This is even more telling since in the rebuilding estimate, isorla and salvage was factored in, thus adequately compensating for any Omnimechs assigned to other tasks.

A more generous estimate(assuming that all mechs not stated as Omnimechs are battlemechs) only changes the rate to 195 Omnimechs a year. This utterly represents the upper limit of Omnimech production, seeing as it estimates that all Trinaries not explictly stated to be Omnimechs are battlemechs, and that all such units are battlemechs as opposed to auxillary forces like Elementals and fighters.

That, is frankly embarassing as hell. Also very difficult to jive with all of the bloodname matches, plus the Grand Melee(although that can be fudged to be a Jade Falcon only thing, with other Clans using saner methods to introduce their wildcard competitor).

Check my math and assumptions on this. You have 40 bloodnames per clan from the eight hundred warriors that followed Nicholas 'I always wanted to be a Mongol warlord' Kerensky, as absorbed or annihilated clans don't seem to keep their genes in circulation at all if Widowmaker and Wolverine are anything to go by. Each of those bloodnames gets twenty-five members IIRC, for a thousand bloodnamed members per clan. Even if every bloodnamed member made it to seventy(and we know that the ones who do are rare at best), you still get twenty bloodname matches per year since getting a bloodname by age twenty is something that happened all of twice. Second line crap only seems to get dragged out for the 20-tonner on elemental augmented matches. There's thirty two competitors in a Bloodname tournament, each contest is one on one for 31 total bouts.

It's impossible to know how many are mechwarrior bouts that end up augmented, and how many of those result in the unrecoverable destruction of a mech. But if you use the more realistic and accurate Bloodnamed average survival age of forty(which is still damned optimistic), assuming they get their Bloodname at twenty, it jumps the number up to 50 matches a year, or 1530 potential chances for an omnimech to explode.

This is completely disregarding the fact that every potential mechwarrior from a sibko is expected to take on three to one odds in their Omnimech, just to graduate. That kicks up the number of Omnis potentially going bye-bye to numbers that 195 per year can't even hope to keep up with.

[PainRack]

Check my math and assumptions on this. You have 40 bloodnames per clan from the eight hundred warriors

That math will have to be fuzzy, as bloodnames got diluted across the clans because of Trials. But it doesn't appear to be a problem in your calcs.

Also, your total number of bouts is inaccurate. Its not one on one for 31 matchs total, but rather, each competitor eliminating each other until they reach the end. So, its only 16 matches per bloodname(ignoring the Grand Meelee which is canon), which leads to a total of 800 possible losses in a year, spread throughout the Clans.

This is completely disregarding the fact that every potential mechwarrior from a sibko is expected to take on three to one odds in their Omnimech, just to graduate. That kicks up the number of Omnis potentially going bye-bye to numbers that 195 per year can't even hope to keep up with.

Most mechwarriors engage 1-2 mechs at the most. Natasha success was considered an anamoly.

Of course, let's not forget that mechwarriors are expected to remain current in combat, which entails raids against other clans or renewed Trials of position.

Material losses in the Clans are exceeding high, the inverse however is that damage is limited and salvage is amazingly high. Consider that Vlad was able to salvage a galaxy worth of mechs from the devastated Wolf forces when reborn as Jade Wolf.

Also as stated, the estimate ignores Omnimechs assigned to training as well as mechs that may be assigned to replace losses. Its my belief however that isorla and salvage adequately compensate for this that Omnimech factory production cannot be orders of magnitude larger than the 45 Omnimech replenishment rate the estimate states.

[Chris OFarrell]

And they seriously thought they could secure the Inner Sphere....

[consequences]

Check my math and assumptions on this. You have 40 bloodnames per clan from the eight hundred warriors

That math will have to be fuzzy, as bloodnames got diluted across the clans because of Trials. But it doesn't appear to be a problem in your calcs.

Also, your total number of bouts is inaccurate. Its not one on one for 31 matchs total, but rather, each competitor eliminating each other until they reach the end. So, its only 16 matches per bloodname(ignoring the Grand Meelee which is canon), which leads to a total of 800 possible losses in a year, spread throughout the Clans.

32 competitors, since Phelan went through five bouts as I recall( Zero-g elemental duel, mech on elemental, mech vs. fighter, kick the cripple, and Vlad). To get down to sixteen requires sixteen individual matches. to get down to eight requires eight more. then four, then two, then finally one, for a total of 31 for any given Bloodname, unless two competitors manage to eliminate each other to give one of the others a free pass.

This is completely disregarding the fact that every potential mechwarrior from a sibko is expected to take on three to one odds in their Omnimech, just to graduate. That kicks up the number of Omnis potentially going bye-bye to numbers that 195 per year can't even hope to keep up with.

Most mechwarriors engage 1-2 mechs at the most. Natasha success was considered an anamoly.

Natasha got four, with three being the expected maximum, and new warriors eliminating two being nothing incredibly remarkable. Of course, Kai Allard-Liao got five, but what he was facing was frankly crap.

The fact remains that to produce enough warriors to compete for all those nifty bloodnames requires the commitment of multiple galaxies of mechs per clan, and that's assuming that only a quarter of the bloodlines produce a single mechwarrior candidate each year. More realistic numbers of newbies jacks the numbers up far higher.

Of course, let's not forget that mechwarriors are expected to remain current in combat, which entails raids against other clans or renewed Trials of position.

Material losses in the Clans are exceeding high, the inverse however is that damage is limited and salvage is amazingly high. Consider that Vlad was able to salvage a galaxy worth of mechs from the devastated Wolf forces when reborn as Jade Wolf.

Also as stated, the estimate ignores Omnimechs assigned to training as well as mechs that may be assigned to replace losses. Its my belief however that isorla and salvage adequately compensate for this that Omnimech factory production cannot be orders of magnitude larger than the 45 Omnimech replenishment rate the estimate states.

Maybe not two or more orders of magnitude larger, but certainly at least one just to keep up with demand. I don't care how awesome their salvagers are, if a mech gets lost to the 'Stackpole effect', there's going to be jack squat left to recover.

Of course, if the techs are awesome enough to limit the nonrecoverable losses to less than a percent of the engaged forces, they should just stage the revolution anyway, since they clearly deserve to hold power more than the warriors.

[Typhonis 1]

Good grief.........are they Hand building the damn mechs? 192 a year at BEST...........Good grief you would think that Fords mass production method or even modern construction methods would have survived.

[Chris OFarrell]

Good grief.........are they Hand building the damn mechs? 192 a year at BEST...........Good grief you would think that Fords mass production method or even modern construction methods would have survived.

Remember. Tanks = te suck in Btech.

[Nephtys]

Good grief.........are they Hand building the damn mechs? 192 a year at BEST...........Good grief you would think that Fords mass production method or even modern construction methods would have survived.

Sounds awfully minimalist. But at the same time, not too outrageous considering the way things are done. Mechs secure key locations, like factory complexes, or military bases..

But 192? Huh. That's less than the total number of mech classes in service across all powers in 3050.

Perhaps if the clans only produced 6 or 7 classes of Omnis, instead of having like 40... that'd help?

[Chris OFarrell]

Really they should only NEED 3 types, perhaps 4 types of Omnimechs...you know, given that they are....Omnimechs.

They don't need 30 different models each.

[Nephtys]

Superlight Scout (20-30 tonner)
Skirmisher (30-40 tonner)
Main Battlemech (45-60 Tonner)
Heavy Battlemech (65-80)
Assault (80-100)

Em.

Yeah. I think that covers what? 90 percent of what we see? Though admittedly, the difference between omni chassis, is that you can't replace a mech's engine or armor, only it's armament. So you'd probably need a new chassis for the 'fast heavy skirmisher' 70 tonners, and a fire support mech...

[Chris OFarrell]

Superlight Scout (20-30 tonner)
Skirmisher (30-40 tonner)
Main Battlemech (45-60 Tonner)
Heavy Battlemech (65-80)
Assault (80-100)

Em.

Yeah. I think that covers what? 90 percent of what we see? Though admittedly, the difference between omni chassis, is that you can't replace a mech's engine or armor, only it's armament. So you'd probably need a new chassis for the 'fast heavy skirmisher' 70 tonners, and a fire support mech...

You seriously don't need that many mechs.

A 30-40 ton mech would be perfectly fine for both scouting and fire support roles. You can make quite nasty 40 ton missile boats in Btech using Clan technology that are mobile enough to act essentially as LRM batteries for the main mechs. And there are BLISTERINGLY fast 40 Tonners that are just far more useful for scouting then 20 Tonners. Firemoths are fast and all, but they are just too tinfoil armor to be viable. Not to mention the heavier mechs would make excellent deep strike raiding units and can carry far more sensor / communications systems.
Just have a couple of variants. One for scouting, one for fire support and perhaps one for anti infantry work.

You can then have a range of mechs in the 60-70 ton range for battle line duties. With close up variants, long range variants and support variants.

Then you can have one or two assault weight variants which fire massive LRM salvos or Arrow 4 artillery or some kind of other massive support weapons. Probably a Quad mech in order to mount seriously heavy weapons. So when the front line calls for fire support, the enemy will start to think God is pissed at them.

So say 3 varients per weight class, thats 9 total kits you'll have to bring along with your supply train, with a far more rapid ability to reconfigure one variant to another

If the Clans did their forces this way (the Inner sphere might not have been able to for the longest time thanks to their craptacular economy post Succession Wars and need to scavenge anything and everything) they would free up a HELL of a lot of industrial capacity.

[PainRack]

32 competitors, since Phelan went through five bouts as I recall( Zero-g elemental duel, mech on elemental, mech vs. fighter, kick the cripple, and Vlad). To get down to sixteen requires sixteen individual matches. to get down to eight requires eight more. then four, then two, then finally one, for a total of 31 for any given Bloodname, unless two competitors manage to eliminate each other to give one of the others a free pass.

Ah..... I see my mistake. My apologies.

The fact remains that to produce enough warriors to compete for all those nifty bloodnames requires the commitment of multiple galaxies of mechs per clan, and that's assuming that only a quarter of the bloodlines produce a single mechwarrior candidate each year. More realistic numbers of newbies jacks the numbers up far higher.

Its actually quite possible to estimate mech losses. IIRC, despite constant mech production from the mechworks, both Hell Horses and Blood Spirit registered no growth in their Touman once.

Assuming that the factory produces 100 mechs a year(using aggregate numbers from the old House sourcebooks), that means a loss rate of a 100 mechs or more in a year.

As for your statement, I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean by quarter of bloodlines producing a single mechwarrior candiate.

If my assumptions about losses and salvage are apparently unsustainable, then I will have to withdraw my theory that replenishment rate= production rate.

The odd part is, prior to 3050, 45 mechs replenishment rate actually compares favourably with the IS.:D:D

Maybe not two or more orders of magnitude larger, but certainly at least one just to keep up with demand. I don't care how awesome their salvagers are, if a mech gets lost to the 'Stackpole effect', there's going to be jack squat left to recover.

Stackpole effect is non-canon.

Of course, if the techs are awesome enough to limit the nonrecoverable losses to less than a percent of the engaged forces, they should just stage the revolution anyway, since they clearly deserve to hold power more than the warriors.

We already learnt from the Succession Wars that "destroyed" regiments could be resurrected from salvage.

Tukayid offers an even more glaring example. Despite the heavy losses suffered, the Clans were able to rebuild shattered clusters from salvage of downed mechs alone. WHILE leaving behind ample equipment for Comstar to pick up.

I don't have the Wolf Clan, Falcon sourcebooks to refer to any longer and the online source I used to refer to for the Tukayid scenario pack is gone, but if possible, I try to find references for this.

Its a god damn brain bug alright. Hell, they already resurrected the Davion Guards because of such salvage ops........................... Someone has to ram down the fact that just because you can hope to salvage 50% of your opponent downed mechs in the game, that doesn't translate to the ingame universe.

Perhaps if the clans only produced 6 or 7 classes of Omnis, instead of having like 40... that'd help?

Won't really help that much I'm afraid. In 3050, despite having only some 16 classes of mechs, and with only various chassises built by various clans, the Clans don't appear to have the ability to build large armies. Galaxies are built up over the period of years. While there's reference to new clusters coming online or in the SJ case, Tau Galaxy, we honestly don't see the provision of new, large formations frequently.

Its telling that the premier Clans could count on some 12-18 galaxies, while lesser clans were hard-pressed to put up 3 galaxies during Operation Revivial. This when even the battered House Marik and House Liao could field larger numbers. Even the FRR could field more troops than many of the Home Clans.

Of course, House Marik has to take the cake. An instance where the ratio of centralised mech regiments to worlds is greater than 1/4? God, how on earth did they survive the 4th Succession War.........

[PainRack]

You seriously don't need that many mechs.

So say 3 varients per weight class, thats 9 total kits you'll have to bring along with your supply train, with a far more rapid ability to reconfigure one variant to another

If the Clans did their forces this way (the Inner sphere might not have been able to for the longest time thanks to their craptacular economy post Succession Wars and need to scavenge anything and everything) they would free up a HELL of a lot of industrial capacity.

Prior to 3055 and the design revivial, the Clans did follow this philosophy...... Somewhat.

There were a few newer designs like the Grendel and Shadow Cat that fought in the invasion, along with the older designs like Kingfisher, but most clans apparently relied on a mixture of 5-6 chassises only.

The problem apparently lies in salvage, and for the Clans, isorla and bondsmen. This tends to mix mech classes even more rapidly than in the IS. But at least the tech and parts are more common than the IS. I always wondered how on earth House Liao could maintain the commandos it had in one of its frontline regiment in 3020, when all production of the commando was in House Steiner hands.

Of course, I liked to know how the hell it managed to acquire enough commandoes that it formed the bulwark of that regiment in the first place:D

[Typhonis 1]

ok so at most we are looking t what? 4000 omnimechs a year being built by all of the clans?

20 claans 200 omnis a year.....

I don`t see why someone hasn`t tried tank spamming the clans yet.

[consequences]

ok so at most we are looking t what? 4000 omnimechs a year being built by all of the clans?

20 claans 200 omnis a year.....

I don`t see why someone hasn`t tried tank spamming the clans yet.

To echo Chris OFarrell, tanks truly are te suck in B-tech. Not only are there numerous truly shitty designs that rely on a single AC5 for their main gun, but the very physics of the universe are perverted to make them less viable combat platforms. From lasers punching straight through their armor instead of ablating like on mechs, to installing equivalent equipment being arbitrarily declared as physically impossible, to tank crews not being intelligent enough to not fire their LRMs when a mech is holding the turret on their own troops, to a mech falling on them instantly destroying them, to tanks being completely unable to traverse an 18 degree slope, there really isn't a single category where they haven't been horrifically nerfed.

With three to one mech superiority, more tanks than the Clan group had mechs(maybe 2-1 superiority or better, I don't recall exactly), and a preliminary artillery bombardment that took out the weaker third of the Clan Force and attritioned the remaining twelve, an Inner Sphere tank force still lost at least one tank for every three Clan mechs engaged in Grave Covenant.