Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
That thing is a freak'n BT unicorn but my Google-Fu was strong tonight.

Hats off to Spector:
General BattleTech Discussion / Re: Robots?!?
« Last post by Kitsune413 on Today at 01:08:25 »
That's why you don't go fishing around old star leage Lostech vaults. Robots.

I appreciate your input on this universe shaking development for me Herb.
So will you ever tell us how much different it is than the story Herb and Ben wrote, or it that plot line now relegated to the ash heap of history?  I mean, if it's gone, why not tell us / let them tell us what WOULD have happened.....

If you head over to Ben Rome's blog you'll get what you're looking for.
I would trial of grievance them like a straight up battletech nerd. Adrian is the best. I choose the back alley they choose the weapons. The whole thing will be terribly cliché.

Anyways. To be honest my comments aren't always conducive to a positive discussion. Over the last few years I've started to think more critically about everything and sometimes trying to think things through that way gives people an opportunity to complain or makes them notice something they wouldn't have otherwise.

Like, I said about the second succession war book that it leaves out my Rasalhague friends, then mention it's got to be tough for the franchise because the player base is pretty fragmented between era's and factions. I'm just making an observation about challenges which I usually follow up with a question about how to fix it. But it just gives other people a chance to jump in and complain about something. Which isn't the intent. But is often the outcome.
General BattleTech Discussion / Re: Robots?!?
« Last post by Recklessfireball1 on Today at 00:50:41 »
Well, apparently the Widow trashed some combat droids, at some time or another.  Maybe they were a secret Star League black project that was forgotten and lay dormant until the Black Widows stumbled upon them and caused them to activate.  Too bad she didn't leave enough left to examine and reverse-engineer the technology  8):
Really?  B/c the set up for the Jormungand is 6/9 . . . which is a bit faster than a max speed of 4 moving its 60kt.  The Meabh at 10kt is 8/12 . . . even the Luftenburg is 3/5 with its 100kt hull.  The Rapier DDG is 5/8 which is interesting since during the FCCW one could have been chased down by a Jormungand . . . with unfortunate results for the Rapier.

  The Jormungand uses the naval vessel construction rules.  You can also make a naval vessel as a mobile structure which limits you to a max speed of 4 for submersibles and 3 for surface vessels (maybe 4 for surface vessels also, the table is ambigious).
  Are you sure about that.  After reading your post I tried to make a Panamax using the mobile structure rules and got something with hideous gas-mileage.

Type: Hangar (25 CF per Hex, 75 ton Capacity with 300 ton max per 4 four levels)
Size: Four 13 Level by 15 Hex interconnected segments (58,500 ton capacity, ironically can't fit through Panama canal)
Power System: 195 Hexes per segment x 3 MP (Max for surface vessels) x 3 ICE Engine = 1755 tons per segment or 7,020 tons for the whole vessel.
Motive System: 195 Hexes per segment x 2 Naval x .3 Hangar = 351 tons per segment or 1404 tons for the whole vessel.
Fuel Weight: 260 Hundred Kilometers x 0.02 ICE x 1755 ton Engine = 9,125 tons of Fuel or 36,500 tons for the whole vessel.

  From these calculations it would take our Mobile Structure Panamax 36,500 tons of fuel to cruise 26,000 kilometers at speed 3 versus under 5,000 tons of fuel for the real ship to cruise at speed 4. 
Really?  B/c the set up for the Jormungand is 6/9 . . . which is a bit faster than a max speed of 4 moving its 60kt.  The Meabh at 10kt is 8/12 . . . even the Luftenburg is 3/5 with its 100kt hull.  The Rapier DDG is 5/8 which is interesting since during the FCCW one could have been chased down by a Jormungand . . . with unfortunate results for the Rapier.
Off Topic / Re: Star Fleet Universe
« Last post by Giovanni Blasini on Today at 00:03:24 »
It's listed under Amarillo Design Bureau, Inc. on the Shapeways Marketplace; the "designer" is listed as adbinc.

Actually, one detail I like from the Starline 2500 CB miniature is that it has a distinct piece underneath the saucer impulse engine which represents that two-box "warp pack".

In the SFU, impulse engines can produce "non-tactical warp", which allows a ship to travel at a cruising speed of approximately nine parsecs per day, yet obliges it to slow to "sub-light" speeds in order to fight. The two-box warp pack is a self-contained item (set apart from the saucer impulse engines) allowing for a limited degree of "tactical warp" movement, or at least to help off-set a Fed ship's photon arming costs.

In addition to the CB and BC, a handful of other Star Fleet ship classes have these warp packs also: the CM from SFB Module R12 and the CX (which is technically an X-upgrade to the CB design) from Module X1. Actually, the warp pack on the CM is not an emergency warp engine; it can be used to generate warp movement, yet must be jettisoned along with the port and starboard engines if this is called for.

Holy crap, 9 parsecs/day?  That works out to around 10714c, or equivalent to Warp 22 on the old Trek OCU warp scale.  Dude, just how fast are Star Fleet Battles ships?!

(One of the reasons I ask has bearing on the Trek fanfic I've been writing, where I've been considering having the M5ized Hermes class jettison her warp nacelle and run on a warp pack in the saucer section, either by kludging the subspace coils in her impulse engine to let her travel at low warp off her fusion reactors and impulse engine's power, or with a new Kerbal-supplied warp drive to do the same).
Bah.  This was perhaps a mistake, highlighting the mystery like this, but its a legend by now.  It simply had to be brought up because of the date it happened.

At this point, I do not think I really care anymore whether or not they ever answer it.  This thing has been teased, repeated, and contradicted so much that it almost feels like TPTB are trolling the fan base with it.  I like some mysteries in the universe -  they add spice to it.  That said, this constant revision, cover-up, conspiracy theory approach has really diminished my interest in the universe.  I have not played the game seriously for MANY years, but I still enjoyed the plotline and scourcebooks, and spent my discretionary dollars accordingly.  But then something changed.  For me, it started with all the vagueness about the Jihad; yes, we finally got some answers, but trying to figure out what was "true" and what was BS made it less interesting to me.  Then came all the ISP books and their canonical uncertainty.  By then I had quit buying supplements on a regular basis.  And isn't that ultimatelywhat the goal is?  To drive interest and sell products?  It is like the constant delay getting ilClan published, or moving the storyline ahead.  They will get to it when they get to it.  And in the meantime, my interest has ebbed to the point where I will get to it when I get to it... in other words, when I am bored enough every couple of years or so and want to see if they have put out anything new or interesting and might consider investing a few more dollars.  I understand tastes may vary and some people like this approach, but for me it has had the opposite effect.

Amen, brother.  I just wish we could see the end of the ISP rumor-oriented trash and go back to a 3rd person, factual books.  They felt more real to me.

I think that it would be healthier for the universe to solve some old mysteries and get some new ones.

Yup.  Write it off as C* screwing around, deserters, survivors, whatever.  Let it die already.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10