Author Topic: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank  (Read 21568 times)

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« on: 24 October 2011, 16:59:22 »
Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank

The Manteuffel is the product of one of the oddities of military procurement, the bizarre rejection of OmniMech programs by the former Federated Commonwealth at the same time they were aggressively seeking OmniVehicles in a maneuver that might have been calculated to drive Khans mad if any of them could be said to care in the first place.  The reasoning behind that decision stems from fiscal considerations, specifically where the money came from; funding for OmniVehicles came from a different account.  StarCorps, long a noted 'Mech manufacturer whose most famous product is almost certainly the Warhammer, both assembled a competent design team in record time and paid off enough of the right parties to earn contracts with both the AFFC and LAAF, including offering directorships to over a dozen officers.  This probably also had something to do with why the huge cost didn't seem to cause trouble with anyone.  Named for a Lyran family noted for armor generals, it takes a number of cues from their tactical theories with a focus on speed and firepower but doesn't neglect armor.  Traditionally the Manteuffel was assigned to only high profile RCTs, most prominently the rebuilding Davion Brigade of Guards and Lyran Guards, as well as the Deneb Light Cavalry.  How the design's manufacturing fared through the Jihad is an open question without any details on the various plants assembling it (Crofton, Loburg, and Son Hoa) but StarCorps, unlike a lot of arms manufacturers, seemingly came through without major assaults on their facilities.  It's entirely possible that the Manteuffel may be one of the few Omnis still in heavy production, something we'll need the full release of the Objectives series to puzzle out.  (The recent release of Objectives: Federated Suns has confirmed its production status, something I'll leave to the PDF until the moratorium expires.)

There are two types of cavalry tanks.  Smaller designs that economize like the Vedette or Myrmidon, and the big, expensive tanks like the Kinnol that employ technology lavishly to achieve their aims.  The Manteuffel is very definitely one of the latter.  At 70 tons, it's on the upper end of tracked designs, and the Magna 350 extralight engine is not cheap but it has the virtue of allowing an 86 kph top speed under normal conditions.  Considering that the speed is one of the things that makes the tank distinctive, I'm not inclined to worry about it that much, but the discussion around the tank five years ago indicated that a lot of people don't find it that helpful, particularly in a strategic sense.  11.5 tons of ferro-fibrous armor includes fixed CASE, arranged 56/40/25/45.  The stern makes me twinge the slightest bit as a thin point but when something meets the short-range HGR test cleanly, it's time for me to quit worrying and learn to love the tank.  23.5 tons of podspace is available for weapons and equipment, the turret having space for up to 15 tons.  Since this is an OmniVehicle, you've automatically got handholds for suits of battle armor short of the assault class to hitch a ride.  While you can't carry Grenadiers or Hauberks this way, nor can you carry quads, a squad of Cavaliers, IS Standards, or Infiltrator IIs can make people leery of getting in your face.  The fact that a Manteuffel is fast enough to get them into the fray fairly quickly and can do so as part of doing its own job is icing on the cake.

The Manteuffel Prime is one of those close range fighters I implied above, although to some extent all of them are.  The “big gun” of the configuration is a class 5 rotary autocannon supplied with three tons of ammunition.  Three ERMLs support it with their own five point hits; how wise that really is, considering that you're obliging yourself to pay for five heat sinks, is something I'm sure I'm not the only one that's remarked on it.  All four ride in the turret as you can see from the tank's artwork.  ECM provides defensive cover as you close or the ability to jam enemy ECM.  Considering the C3 slave the Manteuffel Prime also carries, I'm sure I see some use for that option.  It also lets you circle around the outside and pour in fire from 10-12 hexes if you have a spotter able to run straight into the fire. 

The Manteuffel A is even more of a close-range marauder, swapping autocannons to a massive Ultra/20.  Five tons of ammunition give you plenty of endurance even when you go to rapid fire.  Two standard medium lasers and an ER small are mounted on the front while another C3 slave gives you the ability to sprint in, relying on your armor to absorb blows while you tear open holes for your C3-equipped fellows to exploit.  Unquestionably, the Manteuffel A is a close-range fighter.  There's nothing on here that reaches past 10 hexes, so you absolutely need to just bore in and start ripping into the enemy.  If the Prime needs to be watch it with the rapid fire, the A needs to be even more careful since it's impossible to unjam an Ultra.  Reserve that sort of thing for desperate situations or low target numbers.

Just like the other two, the Manteuffel B is the sort of thing that gets better as you get closer, but the reason is a little different.  It's definitely a “one giant gun” sort of tank, though, namely the biggest gun in the game at the time.  A huge heavy Gauss rifle is fitted to the tank's forward arc (exactly how is one of those questions I'm not sure I want an answer to), fed by four tons of ammunition.  With that much laid into the main gun, the support weapons are fairly puny, only an ERSL and a medium laser.  In practice, because of the way the HGR dominates the loadout, the B is a slave to its peculiarities.  Use your speed to pick around slower opponents and introduce them to the full power of the magnet or keep in medium range of faster foes and pound at them with 20 point sledgehammers they probably can't survive too many hits from.

The Manteuffel works best with some room to operate in.  Tight quarters aren't really your friend.  This simply isn't a Demolisher, which thrives in alleys.  You want to be able to use that 5/8 speed to sprint around.  Your armor's pretty tough but it is breachable and it will get blown open sooner or later, so use your speed to keep that from happening until the inevitable movement hits force you to slow down.  You also want to bring some similarly fast friends or act as the spotter for a C3 network.  Crit-seekers are one of the things Manteuffels are classically missing, for instance, and long-range fire support linked into an A's C3 slave is going to be a nasty combination.

Stopping Manteuffels isn't too hard a task.  The armor is sufficient but not to the levels of some tanks, so killing them is far from impossible.  Your best bet is the classic tank solution of crit-seeking to slow it down and then applying heavy firepower, preferably to the flanks where you've got less armor to punch through.  Beyond the basics, you really want to keep Manteuffels at arm's reach if possible.  All of them are significantly more dangerous up close, without much in the way of long range weapons, so faster units that can evade them and snipe will be a frustrating problem for a Manteuffel player.

References: As with all TRO3067 designs, the Manteuffel is not in the MUL, but the BattleTech Wiki has some of the information you're looking for.  Despite the fact that the Manteuffel is sometimes thought of as a Federated Suns tank, which it is, two of the three known production sites are in Lyran space, and appropriately, the model on display at CamoSpecs.com is in the colors of the Lyran 1st Royal Guards RCT.

Jellico

  • Spatium Magister
  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6126
  • BattleMechs are the lords of the battlefield
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #1 on: 24 October 2011, 18:51:02 »
Charge!!!

Doomed by its pod choices to charge into battle until it gets critted to immobility.
There is also a tendency to leave likely allies like Pattons and Rommels trailing far behind.
A 15 ton turret ring doesn't allow for much in the way of solid long range weapons. You are hard pressed to clear 18 points of damage, which is anemic for such a big expensive tank.

Ultimately this tank is like for what it does well. Big and fast. But it hides a lot of problems.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4879
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #2 on: 24 October 2011, 18:56:50 »
I've always liked the speed on it. It may not have the most firepower of all the tanks out there, but the variants aren't that bad, and its able to get to where they'll be used best. While carrying BA.

I still remember a game from a while back when the GM decided to let us pick our Armor lance. After picking 4 Manteuffels, we weren't allowed to pick next time :)

Jim1701

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1916
  • "Don't Panic"
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #3 on: 24 October 2011, 19:08:07 »
I have some respect for the Manteuffel but I don't really go for expensive tanks generally speaking.  My preferred 75 ton tank is the good ol' Brutus. 

Nikas_Zekeval

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #4 on: 24 October 2011, 19:57:18 »
Charge!!!

Doomed by its pod choices to charge into battle until it gets critted to immobility.
There is also a tendency to leave likely allies like Pattons and Rommels trailing far behind.
A 15 ton turret ring doesn't allow for much in the way of solid long range weapons. You are hard pressed to clear 18 points of damage, which is anemic for such a big expensive tank.

Ultimately this tank is like for what it does well. Big and fast. But it hides a lot of problems.

The Manteuffel always felt like it was planned to be partnered with the Ajax Assault Omnitank, in which case the inclose weaponry made sense, the Ajax taking the long range fire role, while the Mantueffel is the close range pointman.

That six ton third ERML in the prime is a huge waste though, I can see either downgrading all three to regular medium lasers, or dropping the third and stuffing a TC in.  Much more devastating when you could call shots at full rock and roll, but still a nice boost.

And while non-canon the turret ring is large enough to stuff a standard Gauss Rifle up there, with 6.5 tons left over for support weapons and electronics.

My big problem is the cost restrict this machine to high end units, when if they settled for 4/6 with a SFE you could have had nearly the same armor and warload (reduced 1.5 tons total), and just under a quarter of the cost for the base chassis.  You could buy a lance for the price of a single Mantueffel, and used it as a wholesale replacement for a raft of FedSuns heavy tank designs.  Instead of a premier unit only fast tank, you could have had a Omni-MBT produce in numbers to actually be considered a standard heavy tank for the FS, not just a few showpiece units in high profile RCTs.

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25835
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #5 on: 24 October 2011, 22:13:00 »
The Manteuffel (along with the Patton Ultra variant) was the first tank I ever used in the game.

It was pretty funny when a guy on the other side underestimated my speed and got 6 RAC shells in the Center Torso Rear for it.

Ah, good times.
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman

Taurevanime

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1778
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #6 on: 24 October 2011, 23:41:04 »
There are few tracked vehicles that can go as fast as the Manteuffel. And even fewer do so when weighing as much as the Manteuffel does. It is that speed that really makes it stand out as a result. It is not at all a bad design. A few more variants that maybe carry some long range firepower or maybe a C3 Master would help this tank a fair bit.

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25835
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #7 on: 25 October 2011, 01:22:30 »
I agree- a variant that carried a turret mounted PPC backed by missiles would be nice- say one PPC, one LRM 15 with Artemis and 2 tons of ammo, then some vehicle flamers and SRMs on the front and sides with a C3 slave?
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman

Neufeld

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2539
  • Raven, Lyran, Horse, Capellan, Canopian, Bear
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #8 on: 25 October 2011, 04:55:33 »
Thanks for the writeup!

I also think that the Manteuffel needs some configs with long-range weapons. One with a gauss rifle, and one with a LB 10-X is what I would like to have.

"Real men and women do not need Terra"
-- Grendel Roberts
"
We will be used to subdue the Capellan Confederation. We will be used to bring the Free Worlds League to heel. We will be used to
hunt bandits and support corrupt rulers and to reinforce the evils of the Inner Sphere that drove our ancestors from it so long ago."
-- Elias Crichell

Sabelkatten

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6959
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #9 on: 25 October 2011, 08:07:13 »
A turret UAC/10 along with twin ERMLs and a pair of LRM5s in the bow ought to fit. Not fantastic firepower, but you've got a decent chance of causing a PSR at 18 hexes, at least.

Belisarius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1371
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #10 on: 25 October 2011, 08:56:04 »
The Manteuffel is, compared to most other units of its type, the closest to a great MBT that CBT has. It's incredibly expensive for a tank in this game. It's current designs fall short of the chassis' capabilities. But it's still a beast.

It needs a Gauss Rifle variant and a PPC variant and I'll be happy as a pig in slop with the machine.

iamfanboy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1980
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #11 on: 25 October 2011, 09:45:52 »
I am going to go against the grain here and say what I'm thinking:

I do not like this vehicle.

It took me an hour of pondering to figure out just why it offends me, and it comes down to my GM sensibilities about vehicles in the BT universe.

In universe, the justification for using a vehicle instead of a 'Mech is pricetag, ease of maintenance/manufacturing, and/or the 'Mech can't easily do what the vehicle can - artillery, transport infantry, go over water, etcetera. That last point is the whole principle of combined arms!

But the Manteuffel is a Battlemech on treads, requiring the same resources to maintain as 'Mechs do, able to do exactly the same jobs, at exactly the same costs - no, more, because it takes a half-dozen people to operate it whereas a 'Mech needs one.

Compare it to, say, an SHD-5D Shadowhawk for a heavy cav role; much the same weaponry (at least on the Prime variant), and while the Mantie is more heavily armored the SHD has a great deal more mobility, for a much smaller price tag.

Or compare it to a dozen Myrmidons, that being the equivalent pricetag worth. Or, if you want infantry/BA transport, eight Myrmidons and four Maxims.


Its main purpose seems to be (quite frankly, to me) minmaxing in BV1; vehicles were underpriced in BV1 and for 1k points this thing is a beast in small maps.

Which brings up a tangential point; why is it munchkin to use Hellstars and Thunder Hawks, but somehow OK to use Manteuffels and Alacorns?


So, no, I don't like it, but mostly for gamemaster/metagame reasons rather than anything against the design itself.

3rdCrucisLancers

  • SAVAGE
  • Freelance Writer
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3137
  • Smallest star in the firmament
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #12 on: 25 October 2011, 09:51:24 »
Which brings up a tangential point; why is it munchkin to use Hellstars and Thunder Hawks, but somehow OK to use Manteuffels and Alacorns?

Are you seriously making a comparison between the Maneuffel and Hellstars, Alacorns, and Thunder Hawks? Get real. The latter three are all ridiculously optimized and have multiple chances of beheading a foe in the first salvo. The Manteuffel spends six tons on an ER Medium Laser.
Fighter of the Nightman (ah-ah-ah)
Champion of the Sun (ah-ah-ah)

iamfanboy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1980
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #13 on: 25 October 2011, 10:05:24 »
Are you seriously making a comparison between the Maneuffel and Hellstars, Alacorns, and Thunder Hawks? Get real. The latter three are all ridiculously optimized and have multiple chances of beheading a foe in the first salvo. The Manteuffel spends six tons on an ER Medium Laser.
Naw, it was just something that occurred to me when I was thinking of the Manty's BV pricetag compared to a 'Mech of similar capability - why isn't it gauche to pick Alacorns, but it is to deploy Thunder Hawks or Hellstars?

Choosing Manteuffels is akin to saying, "I want a cavalry Omnimech, but I don't want to pay the BV pricetag for one, and all the IS Omnis are too fragile, so let's go with this really great OmniVehicle design instead."

Like I said, it bugs me, but I guess I'm still not able to express why. Maybe because 'Mechs are supposed to be the kings of the battlefield, and design philosophy should reflect that? Naw.

3rdCrucisLancers

  • SAVAGE
  • Freelance Writer
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3137
  • Smallest star in the firmament
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #14 on: 25 October 2011, 10:12:29 »
Naw, it was just something that occurred to me when I was thinking of the Manty's BV pricetag compared to a 'Mech of similar capability - why isn't it gauche to pick Alacorns, but it is to deploy Thunder Hawks or Hellstars?
I think it is fairly gauche to deploy Alacorns, but they do have some serious disadvantages compared to 'mechs. Similarly, using a tank as a cavalry unit, given how easy it is to hamstring them, seems to be asking for trouble.
Fighter of the Nightman (ah-ah-ah)
Champion of the Sun (ah-ah-ah)

iamfanboy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1980
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #15 on: 25 October 2011, 10:29:09 »
I think it is fairly gauche to deploy Alacorns, but they do have some serious disadvantages compared to 'mechs. Similarly, using a tank as a cavalry unit, given how easy it is to hamstring them, seems to be asking for trouble.
Which is why the 12 Myrmidons makes more sense - hard to cripple a dozen of them for the pricetag of this, no?

I dunno. I can't pin down exact reasons why I dislike this guy, yet, except that it is supposed to be a 'Mech equivalent unit and that's what vehicles exactly should not be.

Belisarius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1371
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #16 on: 25 October 2011, 10:43:30 »
In a mech-constrained environment, what else would you do? if you could spend the money to get a mech, but you couldn't get a mech, and you have limited bay space in your dropships (limiting the whole, I'll get fifty Savannah Masters instead response), then you go for a midling assault/heavy tank, preferably omni to carry BA, with good speed for its size, reasonable armor, and fair firepower. Or, in short, the Manteuffel. It's not perfect. It's not even really optimized, given the technology available. But it's solid.

It is a mech replacement when mechs are scarce. And not much more. Is it perfect for that? No. But I don't see anything else better in that class. Myrms are good tanks, but they aren't Manteuffels for a number of reasons: 1. armor, 2. ability to carry BA, 3. speed. Now that's just three, but there are more. The Myrmidon is a great tank, especially for a light. In fact, I like it specifically for the fact that you could drive one onto a dropshuttle if you wanted and include it in the initial drop. But the Manteuffel brings things to the fight that it doesn't. And only a mech could at this moment in the game. If you've got infinite access to mechs, sure. You'd never need the Manteuffel. But isn't that always the limfac?

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25835
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #17 on: 25 October 2011, 10:56:49 »
Price tag is not, and never has been anything more than an excuse in Battletech.  Otherwise nobody would ever field Berserkers and Grand Titans, both of which cost as much as a lance of Fafnirs.
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman

Ian Sharpe

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2143
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #18 on: 25 October 2011, 11:31:06 »
I might use it, but it looks ugly, with the weapons offset to the sides of the turret.  I'd rather see an HPPC or PR config with some newer supporting weapons too.

Headshot

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 318
  • Trust me. I know what i'm doing.
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #19 on: 25 October 2011, 12:58:20 »
In universe, the justification for using a vehicle instead of a 'Mech is pricetag, ease of maintenance/manufacturing, and/or the 'Mech can't easily do what the vehicle can - artillery, transport infantry, go over water, etcetera. That last point is the whole principle of combined arms!

Actually, the limit on Mechs has always been production capacity.
If they could, every unit would instantly trade their tanks for Mechs in a heartbeat.

A. Lurker

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4641
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #20 on: 25 October 2011, 13:24:22 »
Actually, the limit on Mechs has always been production capacity.
If they could, every unit would instantly trade their tanks for Mechs in a heartbeat.

Catch 22 of a sort. Why do the militaries of the Successor States use tanks? Because there aren't enough 'Mechs available. Why aren't there enough 'Mechs available? At least in part because resources that could be used to make more of them keep being diverted to keep tank factories going...

3rdCrucisLancers

  • SAVAGE
  • Freelance Writer
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3137
  • Smallest star in the firmament
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #21 on: 25 October 2011, 14:46:30 »
"Okay" now beats "awesome" later.
Fighter of the Nightman (ah-ah-ah)
Champion of the Sun (ah-ah-ah)

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13701
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #22 on: 25 October 2011, 14:50:08 »
Which is why the 12 Myrmidons makes more sense - hard to cripple a dozen of them for the pricetag of this, no?

I dunno. I can't pin down exact reasons why I dislike this guy, yet, except that it is supposed to be a 'Mech equivalent unit and that's what vehicles exactly should not be.

You can only fit two Myrmidons at most for the dropship space this thing will take up.  There's a fairly hefty bonus to using the Manteuffel.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

Headshot

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 318
  • Trust me. I know what i'm doing.
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #23 on: 25 October 2011, 15:21:14 »
Catch 22 of a sort. Why do the militaries of the Successor States use tanks? Because there aren't enough 'Mechs available. Why aren't there enough 'Mechs available? At least in part because resources that could be used to make more of them keep being diverted to keep tank factories going...

I said production capacity.
Its not the resources, its the factories.
Building tanks, and tank factories, is much, much easier. You can build ICE tanks basically with a 21st century tech base (and some advanced material science).

Taurevanime

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1778
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #24 on: 25 October 2011, 16:19:58 »
While thinking it over I wouldn't mind seeing a version that mounts a standard AC/10 for some special ammo fun. Eventhough that is a mid-range weapon again.

Anyway guys we shouldn't talk about the economics of Battletech because we all know FASAnomics doesn't work. Besides Cray already kills enough Canopian Catgirls as is.

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #25 on: 25 October 2011, 17:03:55 »
I might use it, but it looks ugly, with the weapons offset to the sides of the turret.  I'd rather see an HPPC or PR config with some newer supporting weapons too.

We may see some of that when they get around to releasing the new RS3067 for all of the Omnis.

Nebfer

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1398
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #26 on: 25 October 2011, 19:04:21 »
You know is it's Case fixed? If not you can then put in a pair of PPCs in the turret.

iamfanboy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1980
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #27 on: 27 October 2011, 23:11:46 »
And this beast requires much the same resources as a 'Mech, a really expensive 'Mech, to build. I have little against fusion engine tanks; in more advanced tech societies it makes a great choice because it + a PPC are a great combination for a tank and main gun, or even a solid second gun backing up something even bigger. But XL Fusions just don't feel right.


Mr. Money-Loving Ogre, that's kinda my point - from a tabletop prospective, this is a top-notch tank. XL Fusions are just really good in vehicles - all of the speed and weight gain with no real loss in frailty (any more than tanks already had, unless I've completely forgotten some rule). In fact, it actually INCREASES durability if used right; the more motive hits a vehicle can suffer before being pillboxed the better.


It just bothers me from a GM perspective. The universe should focus on 'Mechs, with vehicles and infantry being a sideline: mooks, support, and occasional threats if players are stupid or badly hurt, able to do things 'Mechs can't, but not equals on the battlefield.

Of course, I'm not the lead dev, or even anything other than a jerk on a forum, so my opinion matters but little. I mean, Battlemechs are only the REASON Battletech exists, that's no reason the game should focus on them...

Dread Moores

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2201
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #28 on: 27 October 2011, 23:16:17 »
It just bothers me from a GM perspective. The universe should focus on 'Mechs, with vehicles and infantry being a sideline: mooks, support, and occasional threats if players are stupid or badly hurt, able to do things 'Mechs can't, but not equals on the battlefield.

The number of 'Mech designs (not even variants) makes it pretty clear that the setting is still quite focused on 'Mechs. I'm guessing you and I will disagree on this, but I don't see the Manty as an equal to very many 'Mechs (XL engine or not).

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25835
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Manteuffel Attack Tank
« Reply #29 on: 28 October 2011, 01:50:48 »
Mr. Money-Loving Ogre, that's kinda my point - from a tabletop prospective, this is a top-notch tank. XL Fusions are just really good in vehicles - all of the speed and weight gain with no real loss in frailty (any more than tanks already had, unless I've completely forgotten some rule). In fact, it actually INCREASES durability if used right; the more motive hits a vehicle can suffer before being pillboxed the better.

I'm trying to figure out what I said that this statement is intended to reply to, because it doesn't really seem to fit any of them.


Quote
It just bothers me from a GM perspective. The universe should focus on 'Mechs, with vehicles and infantry being a sideline: mooks, support, and occasional threats if players are stupid or badly hurt, able to do things 'Mechs can't, but not equals on the battlefield.

Of course, I'm not the lead dev, or even anything other than a jerk on a forum, so my opinion matters but little. I mean, Battlemechs are only the REASON Battletech exists, that's no reason the game should focus on them...

You and I must be reading different rulebooks, because even with the "tougher vehicles" optional rules in TacOps that I more or less insist on if trying to run vees, the rules show massive favoritism towards mechs.  The best way I've found to keep my vehicles alive for any amount of time is to have some of my mechs run up to the enemy forces while shouting "Shoot me!  I'm right in front of you!  Pay no attention to that big tank with all the gauss rifles, I'm obviously so much more of a threat!" and hope that he actually falls for it.
Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

"When in doubt, C4." Jamie Hyneman