Author Topic: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle  (Read 11313 times)

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« on: 01 August 2011, 08:50:54 »
Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle

As usual when we get into an esoteric rule set, I'm going to go into the special rules that apply to the Teppō before delving into the rest of the article.  The tractor and trailer rules are on page 205 of Total Warfare, the hit locations for large support vehicles (also used by super-heavy combat vehicles) are on the next page, and the rules for combat vehicle tractors and trailers are on page.  Considered a large vehicle, Teppōs are 2 levels high - they can't hide in the same holes we're used to sticking artillery units into.  Tractors can move up to a quarter of their tonnage in trailers for either 3 MP or half their Cruising MP, whichever is less.  Above that, up to their own tonnage, they lose half their Cruise MP, period.  (Those of you who are already aware of the Teppō's generous, nay, prodigious ground speed are probably already clutching your towels and trying not to panic.)  Trailers block the LOS of the tractor through the hexside they're located on and wheeled or tracked tractors have to be up front.  Medium trailers (which the Tenmaku and Bokkusu are as far as the trailer rules are concerned - they're talking in support vehicle terms, not combat vehicles) occupy the hex of the tractor.  Also, despite the name, this is a combat vehicle, as are the trailers, meaning that they all have a free ton's worth of communications equipment.

Unlike the design itself, the Teppō's origins are quite mundane and readily understandable.  After getting hammered on, battered, bedraggled, ridden hard, and put up wet since 3050, the DCMS was finally ready to take another look at improving military policy and procedure.  Part of it was the need to preserve command and logistical staff, something the Ryuken, with methods patterned on those of Wolf's Dragoons with somewhat less in the way of endowment in the fiat department, had managed better than the average DCMS line regiment despite extreme losses.  They also used command and control vehicles and conventional units more readily; how much more in the case of the former, I can't really tell, since Daimyos were certainly being spread around and were even operated by the Sword of Light.  So, in some ways, the idea of building a new command and control unit is really not a departure for the DCMS, it's a return to older traditions.  Each one is built more or less by hand by Pesht Motors on Unity over the course of several months, so this is apparently supposed to be the stately Rolls-Royce of command units.  The first one is going to the Ryuken-san; the DCMS is pondering wider deployment while the Republic Armed Forces are waiting for results before going to the Combine about either buying some or getting a production license.

As I hinted, the design is... well... I'll be nice and say ambitious.  As a command, support, and artillery bunker, which it will be once someone gets a few shots at it and very nearly is to begin with, the Teppō is fairly impressive and can even crawl around a bit, so you don't have to erect it in place.  Unfortunately, the operational specification called for a vehicle and we're not doing quite so well there.  At 150 tons with a wheeled chassis, this thing is absolutely massive, and as a consequence of getting bigger, it's also painfully slow, reaching 33 kph despite a 280 Nissan fuel cell.  Okay, fine, that's nothing new.  Several vehicles get by with that sort of speed, although it's also something that many players (including the author) have traditionally not been especially enthusiastic about for various reasons.  It has to rely on either aircraft or DropShips for any real mobility; the former gets to deal with StratOps rules for moving units as cargo and we don't actually have any that can carry one at the moment.  Those of you suggesting Tonbos, no such luck - they top out at 112 tons.  Since disrupting command and control is one of those time-honored battlefield solutions and the Teppō is certainly not going to outrun anything faster than an UrbanMech with actuator problems, someone stuck 20 tons of heavy ferro-fibrous on here, arranged 60/56/56/55/57 (front/front side/rear side/rear/turret).  Hitting it once it's located isn't much of a problem but with that sort of armor and 15 points of internal structure, actually killing it is a bit of a bother unless you generate an instant death crit.  Okay, fine, so far, it's a lot like a tortoise - slow and hard-shelled.  The justification for all of this is the payload.  The turret is dedicated to a Sniper artillery piece with three tons of ammunition, enough for five minutes of continuous fire.  Backing that up is a pair of Arrow IVs pointed forward with three tons each.  Yes, if there's TAG in play, it's definitely going to deliver "the firepower of an assault 'Mech to a battlefield kilometers away from its position."  To be precise, four of them.  Whether you want to be within seventy hexes of an ongoing firefight in something that can't outrun an UrbanMech is your problem; if you hide well enough, it can probably work.  If.  TRO3085 Supplemental also notes that it doesn't waste tonnage on short-range offensive weapons and it's not kidding.  An LMG fore and aft will discourage infantry a bit (keep the trailer LOS in mind, though) while an AMS was carried on each side and the front.  ECM is included to thicken the defenses.  A 4 ton infantry compartment was provided along with an extra ton of communications equipment.

Okay, fine, that's the Teppō, but I must've had a reason for going over the tractor and trailer rules, right?  Yes indeed!  Supplied with the Teppō are the Tenmaku and Bokkusu.  Both of them are 75 ton trailers with a 1 ton 10-rated fusion engine installed to provide power.  (Those of you looking at logistics should be aware that this means they can be used to generate hydrogen fuel for fighters or fuel cell vehicles.  Like, say, the Teppō.)  Both have CASE and heavy ferro-fibrous armor.  The Tenmaku's turret earns it an extra three tons, arranged 60/60/60/57, while the Bokkusu has a mere twelve tons laid out 60/59/60.  The real differences are in the equipment.  Tenmakus are command and control units.  Their defensive armament consists of a pair of medium pulse lasers, two LMGs with a full ton of ammunition, and an AMS unit.  Additional AMS mounts are on the sides, splitting four tons between the three units.  It also has a second ECM unit.  Since the two C3 master computers mean it's probably going to draw a lot of fire from time to time, that's not a bad choice.  Personally, I think this is more in the way of the Zugvogel's use of a C3 master as a command and control extension, not directly intended for use as a company master.  Another ten tons of communications equipment - more than enough to do basically any of the things communications equipment can do in TacOps and then some, as well as probably enough to teleconference a really awesome session of D&D - and five tons of mission-specific equipment are mounted.  Finally, there's another four ton infantry compartment.  Bokkusus, on the other hand, are basically big, really well supplied mobile field bases.  They've got an AMS mount on all sides with three tons of ammo but that's it for weapons.  Otherwise, they rely on the eight tons of infantry compartment (or, rather, the people in that compartment) for defense.  Speaking of mobile field bases, it has one, along with a lift hoist and 18 tons of cargo capacity.  The arrangement of hitches - only a forward hitch on the Tenmaku but one fore and aft on the Bokkusu - indicates that a convoy of all three together is arranged Teppō - Bokkusu - Tenmaku.

On the scale of good ideas, personally, I'd rank the Teppō right around the same level as the Owens.  The basic concept is sound and there's some good ideas in the mix but the actual end result falls a bit flat even if it manages to muddle through and get the job done.  I want to establish something right now: "Should" and "supposed to" are concepts that sound operational planning needs to minimize.  When you're 2/3 and sometimes reduced to 1/2 by standard operating procedure, hearing them applied to your movement options and consequent enemy proximity is about as soothing as being told that most of the crocodiles in that lake you're swimming in "should be" toothless.  If you can, deploy off-board and stay there, using something more mobile to boost sensor rolls.  If you can't, you need to become intimately familiar with a certain Monty Python clip.  Double blind is your friend.  Find a deep, dark hole as soon as possible, crawl to the most miserable, lonely abyss in it, and then pull it in after you.  Don't use bodyguards that are going to be obvious and if you can, pull them in with the hole.  Tenmakus are a bad idea for running a company network in my opinion so the fact that you can't use it to do that if it's off-board doesn't bother me in the slightest.  If you try it, be prepared for the network to get cut - a master this slow is trivially easy to jam, especially since it's not likely to be particularly close to the engagement.   One thing you can do is monitor remote sensors under double blind.  If you're bringing Copperhead and homing Arrow rounds along, there's no reason not to slip semi-guided into the bins of your LRM-armed units, too.  For the BA complement, if you're not using TacOps BA sizes, I'd stuff at least two squads of Kanazuchis in there for close-in defense, and then maybe a couple of squads of Voids or TAG-equipped Kages to spread out and act as spotters for the artillery.  Honestly, aside from the artillery and the potential for using the command rules (something I have no real knowledge of), the Teppō and its trailers are really objectives to be taken or defended, not combat units.  That goes double for the Bokkusu.  Also, please note that there's no obligation to use a Teppō as the tractor for either trailer.  Anything seventy-five tons or larger can tow one of them if it has a trailer hitch.  They may not be much faster (about the best you can manage is 2/3, even with a 5/8 tractor) but it's an option you have if you've got a 75 ton or larger tank with a trailer hitch.  While we don't have the quirks to tell for certain, it seems to be a nearly universal feature of tracked combat vehicles judging from the entries in TRO: Prototypes since the only one that lacks a hitch is the Hunter Amphibious Tank.  (Author's Note: On reflection, I think I might have hit on something with the bunker remark.  It really does keep making more sense to me when thought about as a bunker that's easily deployed to another world without tying up a DropShip rather than as a command and support vehicle.)

Enough of my grumpy meanderings.  If you're not fortunate enough to be a Snake, this is something you're concerned with countering, not wondering how you use this thing the Quartermaster shipped without being invited to consider the virtues of cold steel and your intestines entering a short, passionate relationship if you get it wrong.  The ways a Teppō and its little friends can be annoying in combat rely on spotters, so deal with them ruthlessly.  Mercy is for people who like taking artillery fire.  If you're unsure which direction it's in and someone's using a Tenmaku to manage a company network, one way to find it is to move an ECM unit around and see if you can disrupt it.  Once you have that, you know what direction the Tenmaku is in.  Whether it's still attached to the other two or not is an open question - someone feeling sneaky might well use another unit with a trailer hitch to haul the Tenmaku (and possibly the Bokkusu) to one spot while the Teppō, possibly with the battle armor in tow, is hiding somewhere else.  The other thing is to bring the reconnaissance assets to find it.  Satellites may or may not be a good option - the Tenmaku has enough communications gear to hack one. Once it's located, it's not going anywhere, so just use your own artillery or close in and pound it; be prepared to keep at it.  As little use as the armor is in keeping a Teppō mobile, it's going to make actually pounding through and killing the thing annoying and the trailers aren't much better.  Air attacks may be useful but keep in mind that artillery can throw up a hellacious flak barrage, not to mention the risk of Air Defense Arrows if someone's feeling nervous about the possibility for some reason.

References:  As the Teppō currently lacks a record sheet, the MUL does not include it, although you can find the artwork of one hauling a Tenamku over at Sarna.  To date, no miniature has been produced.
« Last Edit: 28 October 2011, 16:50:02 by Moonsword »

Neufeld

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2539
  • Raven, Lyran, Horse, Capellan, Canopian, Bear
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #1 on: 01 August 2011, 09:41:24 »
It is a big and heavy basket full of eggs.

"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

Kojak

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4612
  • Melancon Lives!
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #2 on: 02 August 2011, 01:09:06 »
Lovely article. I'm still looking forward to trying out this vehicle largely because I think it gives the DCMS some interesting options that it didn't really have a great way of bringing onto the field before. Is it a great vehicle? Not really, but when has the DCMS ever had particularly great equipment compared to their enemies? It's part of what makes playing them so much fun.


"Deep down, I suspect the eject handle on the Hunchback IIC was never actually connected to anything. The regs just say it has to be there."
- Klarg1

Demos

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1602
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #3 on: 02 August 2011, 09:37:33 »
Hopefully it could one day played with MM (after introducing trailers)  :)

Quote
To be precise, four of them.  Whether you want to be within seventy hexes of an ongoing firefight in something that can't outrun an UrbanMech is your problem
In my book it should be 130 hexes.
Ah, and yes, thats the reason of escorts for such force multipliers.
"WoB - Seekers of Serenity, Protectors of Human Purity, Enforcers of Blake's Will!"

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #4 on: 02 August 2011, 10:55:35 »
Lovely article. I'm still looking forward to trying out this vehicle largely because I think it gives the DCMS some interesting options that it didn't really have a great way of bringing onto the field before. Is it a great vehicle? Not really, but when has the DCMS ever had particularly great equipment compared to their enemies? It's part of what makes playing them so much fun.

The only thing in here they didn't have before was the mobile field base.  The rest of it they had with a mix of vehicles, including the Daimyo.

Ah, and yes, thats the reason of escorts for such force multipliers.

Of course you're using them.  On the other hand, they're not necessarily going to stop someone's counterbattery fire or fighter strikes (risky but worth it considering the target) from turning the Teppo into a particularly tough rough with some fancy barrels pointing out.  Once that happens, your escorts had better be up to stopping headhunting teams.

Kojak

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4612
  • Melancon Lives!
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #5 on: 02 August 2011, 15:24:11 »
The only thing in here they didn't have before was the mobile field base.  The rest of it they had with a mix of vehicles, including the Daimyo.

Well, I guess to be more specific I ought to have said that they didn't have a great way to bring them onto the field on one vehicle. It does make me think about what you said at the end of the article, though, about bringing the trailers with a different vee instead of using the actual Teppō. I wonder which DCMS tanks would work best for that.
« Last Edit: 02 August 2011, 15:26:06 by Kojak »


"Deep down, I suspect the eject handle on the Hunchback IIC was never actually connected to anything. The regs just say it has to be there."
- Klarg1

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #6 on: 02 August 2011, 16:40:10 »
Therein lies the problem.  Given the size necessary to get all of this on the field in one vehicle and a couple of trailers, I'm not convinced doing it is either necessary or a good idea.  You're not getting around the need for 400 tons to move them in vehicle bays whatever you do.  (Two heavy bays for the trailers, one super-heavy for the Teppō itself.)  At that point, why not use heavy tank chassis to get all of this in four vehicles?  You may pay more in C-Bills but the mobility - even if it's only tactical - is worth the price in my opinion.  Like I said in the article, the Teppō is ambitious, and I think it's overreaching itself.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #7 on: 02 August 2011, 16:54:37 »
Great article, Moonsword:

The Teppō was another of those "We haven't done something in this weight/class before" and was certainly an interesting vehicle to design. Pretty sure we created at least one errata in the process.

Mission Specific Equipment: This is tonnage devoted to the command deck of the HQ. The holo table, conference room, chairs, etc.

Mission Doctrine: The intention of the design was for the Teppō to haul the trailers to a position "near" the front lines and park/hide them. Then it would move closer to the battlefield to act as an artillery support vehicle.

Best,
Joel BC
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #8 on: 02 August 2011, 17:22:13 »
I didn't notice anything looking at the vehicle and it certainly outlines the design problems and possibilities in that class.  I think something less likely to draw fire - the Bokkusu, for instance - is probably more workable.  On the other hand, I think I might have hit on something with the semi-mobile bunker comment.  It's not really a command and support vehicle, it's a command and support bunker you can move to other worlds and deploy (including move into position) without a full engineering staff and major earth moving equipment.

Nikas_Zekeval

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1625
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #9 on: 02 August 2011, 19:03:40 »
It is a big and heavy basket full of eggs.

"Our objective?  Blow up the basket."  }:)

JadeHellbringer

  • Easily Bribed Forum Administrator
  • Administrator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 21768
  • Third time this week!
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #10 on: 03 August 2011, 09:56:37 »
It's an interesting idea, but it's just SO immobile that it's either getting left behind as the front lines move- hopefully AWAY from it, because it isn't escaping if it has to- or you're using it in a defensive static role, in which case you might as well just have an HQ in the first place. Good unit for flavor and for showing the inherent problems with a huge vehicle like this, but not something I'd want to have to find uses for.
"There's a difference between the soldier and his fight,
But the warrior knows the true meaning of his life."
+Larry and his Flask, 'Blood Drunk'+

"You know, basically war is just, like, a bunch of people playing pranks on each other, but at the end they all die."
+Crow T. Robot+

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #11 on: 03 August 2011, 15:10:04 »
It's an interesting idea, but it's just SO immobile that it's either getting left behind as the front lines move- hopefully AWAY from it, because it isn't escaping if it has to- or you're using it in a defensive static role, in which case you might as well just have an HQ in the first place. Good unit for flavor and for showing the inherent problems with a huge vehicle like this, but not something I'd want to have to find uses for.

Yeah well I tried for a 3/5 but the engine was so big it kind of defeated the point. Oh and art came first, so I had an outline to work from there that dictated the weapons loads. I could either make those missile racks LRMs or Arrow IVs. With LRMs people might actually want to use this thing on the battlefield.
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Moonsword

  • Acutus Gladius
  • Global Moderator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16596
  • You interrupted me reading TROs for this?
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #12 on: 03 August 2011, 15:50:44 »
3/5 off a 150 ton wheeled unit... a 430 engine?  I can see where that would be a problem.  It wouldn't really change the problem with the trailers, though, and my guess is that a 580 engine, even an XXLFE, would probably be heavier than the Teppo is before you account for shielding.  What the monstrous hypothetical 880 engine necessary to move a Teppo-sized wheeled design at 6/9 would clock in at is probably not something we want to think about.

As far as the LRMs... I don't know.  You'd get more tonnage out of it to do something with but I'm not really sure what else you'd do with it except maybe bring more battle armor and create a second HQ vehicle.  The Arrow IVs give you a lot of artillery punch - three Sniper-equivalent HE blasts inside 8 mapsheets, for instance, and all of them reasonably supplied with ammo - and make fighting with the command company of a regiment a fairly dicey proposition even without reinforcements from the rest of the unit.  In that sort of an engagement, where the Tenmaku is basically obliged to be a participant, using it as a company master starts making more sense.

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #13 on: 03 August 2011, 22:55:18 »
Another thing to consider is the size of the battlefield. C3 works on the battlefield for the game. We often think in 2 to 3 mapsheets. Imagine the big epic battles you see at some cons or if you were to use MegaMek and created a 100 by 100 battlefield or larger. Suddenly a semi mobile C3 master might make more sense.

Though I admit I never really expected it to be a functional C3 master. That was more for the fluff then the practicality. Still, I'd love to run a large scale battle with the threesome.
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Headshot

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 318
  • Trust me. I know what i'm doing.
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #14 on: 04 August 2011, 00:20:44 »
They wouldn't have armed the thing with LRMs anyway. Remember we're talking about the Dracs here, they would have used MRM40s instead... :D

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #15 on: 04 August 2011, 11:36:24 »
They wouldn't have armed the thing with LRMs anyway. Remember we're talking about the Dracs here, they would have used MRM40s instead... :D

Touche
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4883
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #16 on: 04 August 2011, 15:11:02 »
I've looked over it a bit, and find the Teppo....well, odd.

I mean, do you drop off your "command" trailers and then wander off at a stately 2/3, risking leaving the commanders and equipment high and dry just incase someone tries to track them down? Do you stick around, and risk counter-battery fire when you use your Sniper and Arrow IVs?

It really seems like one of those "Damned if you do, damned if you don't," designs.

I'm also kind of curious about some of the equipment choices like the ton of communications equipment on the Teppo. Since its a combat vehicle, it gets a ton automatically, but as far as I know, the second ton doesn't actually net you anything? It takes 3 tons to give a modifier AFAIK.

Einhander

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 59
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #17 on: 12 August 2011, 15:55:49 »
Its to bad that the Teppo had a turret mounted sniper and forward mounted Arrow launcher.

Having the Arrow in the turret and the Sniper in the hull would allow for... borrowed... ADA missiles to be used to defend the monster.

Also, it would be interesting to see an Arrow unit in a new trailer itself with a turret, with maybe some drone controls or what not. Distribute the fun around a bit and allow for a land and air kill zone within a few mapsheets. Bring in a few flatbeds with some turrets/engineering equipment and really dig in.

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8392
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #18 on: 27 March 2014, 16:15:12 »
OK,something not mentioned before. If I remember correctly because of it's size the Teppo can carry two squads of BA infantry on the outside, of course as this monster ISN'T an Omni they'll need magclamps to do it

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40867
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #19 on: 27 March 2014, 16:19:51 »
News to me. Source?

Also, I'm not sure just how useful this would be. Teppos are slow enough as-is, is it really worth it to slow them down more with troopers? Even if I'm wrong and vehicles aren't slowed down by magclamp troops like 'mechs are, would it really be all that useful? It's slow enough that most suits can keep up by themselves.
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8392
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #20 on: 27 March 2014, 16:41:41 »
Page 227 of TW, note how the table says that there are two BA troopers at each location for large support vehicles?

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40867
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #21 on: 27 March 2014, 16:45:49 »
Huh. Turns out you're right.

An interesting capability. Still not exactly sure when it'd be useful, but you might be seeing something I'm not.
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8392
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #22 on: 27 March 2014, 17:25:55 »
Huh. Turns out you're right.

An interesting capability. Still not exactly sure when it'd be useful, but you might be seeing something I'm not.
Be more useful, and a better place to point it out, in an article on the Gulltoppr OmniMonitor but we don't have one of those yet

JadeHellbringer

  • Easily Bribed Forum Administrator
  • Administrator
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 21768
  • Third time this week!
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #23 on: 27 March 2014, 20:47:57 »
If your Teppo is in a situation where those BA troopers are seeing work, you didn't handle your Teppo properly.
"There's a difference between the soldier and his fight,
But the warrior knows the true meaning of his life."
+Larry and his Flask, 'Blood Drunk'+

"You know, basically war is just, like, a bunch of people playing pranks on each other, but at the end they all die."
+Crow T. Robot+

Welshman

  • Mostly Retired Has Been
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10509
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #24 on: 27 March 2014, 23:53:39 »
If your Teppo is in a situation where those BA troopers are seeing work, you didn't handle your Teppo properly.

It's not the size that counts, it's how you use it? ;)
-Joel BC-
Catalyst Freelancer (Inactive)

"Some closets will never contain Narnia, no matter how many times we open the door." - Weirdo, in relation to the power of hope.

glitterboy2098

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 12047
    • The Temple Grounds - My Roleplaying and History website
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #25 on: 28 March 2014, 00:32:57 »
ultimately, this is going to see more use as an objective than as a unit in a regular force.

as an HQ unit, i has a few advantages over older designs in that regard.. its way tougher, and that Sniper artillery can load Flak ammo, and the Arrow-4's anti-aircraft missiles, giving it pretty decent air defense. and it has enough ammo to let it carry both those and regular munitions. useful for defending itself from headhunter raids. the BA squads it can carry add an extra bit of defense against those as well. (especially BA headhunter attacks, like the Clans do, and the IS seems to be picking up on with their special ops getting BA.)
the C3 master's on the trailer let it co-ordinate a company of C3 equipped vehicle escorts.. the C3 Air Defense partisan's are IS general by the republic age, and i know there are other ground vehicles with C3 that could be assigned for defense. 4 air defense partisans, 2 lance command partisans, and 5 MRM Demolishers would be a nasty escort when tied into the company command net of the Teppo. especially if you toss in a lance of light BA transports (perhaps light VTOl's that can scout) with extra BA to round it out.

a command vehicle is almost always going to be guarded.. this one just tries to provide force multipliers for its guards, not just be a van with some maps and radios in it.

DaveMac

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1217
  • Running for home...
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #26 on: 28 March 2014, 03:48:46 »
The basic idea is rather interesting and like the fluff at lot but to me its one big immobile target crying out to be hit by artillery or bombs

Go to red alert!
Are you sure sir?  It does mean changing the lightbulb.

Weirdo

  • Painter of Borth the Magic Puma
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Major General
  • *
  • Posts: 40867
  • We can do it. We have to.
    • Christina Dickinson Writes
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #27 on: 28 March 2014, 06:52:28 »
It's hardly immobile. And that's what the Sniper and Arrows are for. Quite nice to have an HQ that can provide its own AA defense and counter-battery fire.
My wife writes books
"Thanks to Megamek, I can finally play BattleTech the way it was meant to be played--pantsless!"   -Neko Bijin
"...finally, giant space panties don't seem so strange." - Whistler
"Damn you, Weirdo... Damn you for being right!" - Paul
"...I was this many years old when I found out that licking a touchscreen in excitement is a bad idea." - JadeHellbringer
"We are the tribal elders. Weirdo is the mushroom specialist." - Worktroll

False Son

  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6461
  • Kot Blini
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #28 on: 28 March 2014, 09:29:25 »
Even if it is immobilized, this is a command vehicle.  It should be teamed with AA platforms from the start to fend off ASFs.  I don't mind the Teppo at all.  It has everything I want in a command vehicle without overly committing to direct combat.  The biggest criticism I have is the fact that it is wheeled.  But, there's only so many times I can say that, and only so many vehicles I can knock on the head with that.
TOYNBEE IDEA
IN MOViE `2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER


Destroy what destroys you

glitterboy2098

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 12047
    • The Temple Grounds - My Roleplaying and History website
Re: Vehicle of the Week: Teppō Support Vehicle
« Reply #29 on: 28 March 2014, 10:50:10 »
Even if it is immobilized, this is a command vehicle.  It should be teamed with AA platforms from the start to fend off ASFs.  I don't mind the Teppo at all.  It has everything I want in a command vehicle without overly committing to direct combat.  The biggest criticism I have is the fact that it is wheeled.  But, there's only so many times I can say that, and only so many vehicles I can knock on the head with that.

thus why i suggested a mixof C3 partisan AA tanks and MRM demolishers.. though those were just the first ones to pop into mind. the C3 partisans give you a nasty air defense cordon, and since they use LB10X's as well as AC2's, and even the C3 master versions have UAC5's.. you can use them for ground defense as well. backed up by the triple MRM-30 launchers of each Demolisher, you can make an assault on the combine HQ a very lossy proposition.. forget about using a lance of mechs or a platoon of BA.. you'd have to hit that Teppo command center with at least a battalion to ensure victory. and forget about airstrikes unless you can afford to send a whole aero-regiment at it.

 

Register