Author Topic: MotW: Blackjack  (Read 35954 times)

Liam's Ghost

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7860
  • Miss Chitty finds your honor rules quaint.
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #120 on: 20 November 2019, 18:56:57 »
The BJ-2 and BJ-3 were the products of different states, and numbers get skipped all the time when designating new models, so it looks weird but isn't unreasonable.

Certainly no Rifleman 3N vs 3N-2 situation.
Good news is the lab boys say the symptoms of asbestos poisoning show an immediate latency of 44.6 years. So if you're thirty or over you're laughing. Worst case scenario you miss out on a few rounds of canasta, plus you've forwarded the cause of science by three centuries. I punch those numbers into my calculator, it makes a happy face.

(indirect accessory to the) Slayer of Monitors!

glitterboy2098

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11991
    • The Temple Grounds - My Roleplaying and History website
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #121 on: 20 November 2019, 19:07:54 »
iirc though wasn't Ceres Metals the only surviving producer of the blackjack post 2nd succession war? so while the BJ-2 might have been produced for the fedcom, it would have to have been built on St. Ives. (which given the Compact's post 4th war relationship with the fedcom, would not be a hurdle)

thus my speculation that a BJ-2 prototype might have existed in 3028, causing them to skip the number.

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25633
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #122 on: 20 November 2019, 19:18:35 »
That depends on whether the BJ-2 was built on new frames or originally done as an upgrade of existing Blackjacks.
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

Caedis Animus

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2129
  • How can a bird be sultry? Very carefully.
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #123 on: 20 November 2019, 19:19:51 »
thus my speculation that a BJ-2 prototype might have existed in 3028, causing them to skip the number.
You know, this makes me kind of wish there was a Battletech mini TRO series where they'd sell a small book with an in-depth of every variant of a given chassis plus a few new ones alongside a miniature of said chassis and some sprues for modifying it.

Hell, just PDFs for it would be nice, I don't even need the mini.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37059
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #124 on: 20 November 2019, 20:49:28 »
That threshold sounds a lot like "fan-produced"...  ^-^

VhenRa

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2251
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #125 on: 21 November 2019, 00:02:30 »
iirc though wasn't Ceres Metals the only surviving producer of the blackjack post 2nd succession war? so while the BJ-2 might have been produced for the fedcom, it would have to have been built on St. Ives. (which given the Compact's post 4th war relationship with the fedcom, would not be a hurdle)

thus my speculation that a BJ-2 prototype might have existed in 3028, causing them to skip the number.

I'll point out... Objective Raids says the Blackjack line on St. Ives was originally circa 3030 a Vindicator line, but St. Ives couldn't sell Vindicators to the AFFS/AFFC/SIMC [Lack of demand, not legality] so they retooled it for Blackjacks.

The original TRO 3050 only describes the BJ-2 as a field modification kit as well.

As far as I am aware no one is building Blackjacks until 3054 when GM-Talcott restarted production.
« Last Edit: 21 November 2019, 00:07:14 by VhenRa »

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4444
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #126 on: 21 November 2019, 04:23:19 »
it is an oddity.. the result of a mix of the BJ-3 being retroactively inserted into the setting well after the BJ-2 had been established in TRO3050, and the general FASA trend of not giving a [bleep].

honestly though i wouldn't be surprised if maybe the prototype for what would become the BJ-2 didn't exist already in setting (a BJ-2X or something), leading to the BJ-3.
given that it looks likely that both were built on St.ives. if the BJ-2 prototype had a lot of growing pains (or just a lot of redesigns) i could see a 20 year development cycle. especially if the design got shelved for a bit after the 4th succession war and then revisited around 3039. we've honestly seen worse in the setting.


I can see a BJ-2X but its going to have worse heat problems than the BJ-3X. The prototype  ER-L Lasers generate 12+1D6 heat. Maybe if it's based on the BJ-1DB and given DHS-Ps?



Ursus Maior

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 446
  • Just here for a little mayhem.
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #127 on: 21 November 2019, 04:43:32 »
That is a bit of an "oops."  On the other hand, rule of cool dominates designation/numbering convention in this setting.  The letter suffix is sometimes a good clue as to which faction it goes with but not always, especially pre-TRO 3050 material.  FASA started to tighten up the faction specific machines in TRO 3055.
I always assumed that ComStar, and the SLDF before them, decided on these BattleMech codes. It's rather unlikely, in my experience, that dozens and dozens of producers, licensees and factories adhere to a unified code of 'Mech denomination.

Probably Davion factories name a lot of their 'Mechs differently than Liao or Kurita producers name those types. Maybe even quarter masters and military leadership have their own denomination for them. The F-5 'Tiger', the F-20 'Tigershark', the YF-17, T-38 Talon and half a dozen knock offs and renames might in the BTU just have ended up being called TIGR-F5 Tiger and then F-17X, F-20 etc.

So, I'd handle the BJ-3 as an initial oversight on ComStar's end of business. And probably a ROM agent being transfered to a listening post in the interstellar deep.
liber et infractus

grimlock1

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2087
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #128 on: 21 November 2019, 10:49:00 »
I'll point out... Objective Raids says the Blackjack line on St. Ives was originally circa 3030 a Vindicator line, but St. Ives couldn't sell Vindicators to the AFFS/AFFC/SIMC [Lack of demand, not legality] so they retooled it for Blackjacks.
Wow. Talk about in-universe bias.  The Blackjack's quad medium laser array is pretty good, but the paired AC/2's are a bit niche.  The two mechs have the same mobility and similar armor, yet I would say the Vindicator is probably the more flexible and generally useful of the two.  Yet the AFFS wanted nothing to do with them...  Neat bit of world building. 
I'm rarely right... Except when I am.  ---  Idle question.  What is the BV2 of dread?
Apollo's Law- if it needs Clan tech to make it useable, It doesn't deserve those resources in the first place.
Sure it isn't the most practical 'mech ever designed, but it's a hundred ton axe-murderer. If loving that is wrong I don't wanna be right.

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 28960
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #129 on: 21 November 2019, 11:44:38 »
Wow. Talk about in-universe bias.  The Blackjack's quad medium laser array is pretty good, but the paired AC/2's are a bit niche.  The two mechs have the same mobility and similar armor, yet I would say the Vindicator is probably the more flexible and generally useful of the two.  Yet the AFFS wanted nothing to do with them...  Neat bit of world building.

Not Invented Here . . . just think of the T-12- US designer got it built in Russia.
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

grimlock1

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2087
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #130 on: 21 November 2019, 14:51:25 »
Not Invented Here . . . just think of the T-12- US designer got it built in Russia.
Oh, I believe it!  The US captured plenty of German helmets after WWII, did some testing and noticed that the German helmet offered better protection than the M1.  Efforts to adopt something similar were stymied multiple times because some kept pointing out "Uh, dude, we can't use this.  It looks just like what the Nazis used."  And thus, the US soldier went into battle for 35 years with inferior kit because the better item had uncomfortable connotations in the mind of the leadership.

It's just neat to see that level of stupidity reflected in-universe.
« Last Edit: 21 November 2019, 14:59:58 by grimlock1 »
I'm rarely right... Except when I am.  ---  Idle question.  What is the BV2 of dread?
Apollo's Law- if it needs Clan tech to make it useable, It doesn't deserve those resources in the first place.
Sure it isn't the most practical 'mech ever designed, but it's a hundred ton axe-murderer. If loving that is wrong I don't wanna be right.

Arkansas Warrior

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9203
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #131 on: 21 November 2019, 15:09:14 »
I have a hard time with that bit of fluff.  Mechs are in such great demand, and so readily salvaged, that I can’t see a state turning down a capable design like the Vindicator.  Davion kept building Cataphracts in captured factories, right?  When Kurita took Quentin, they kept building Victors and Atlases.  The Kell Hounds were fielding Panthers in the Warrior Trilogy.  (Ok, the way they talk about them suggests that Dan and Morgan consider driving a Panther a bit déclassé, but it’s still way better than being dispossessed.)  Would the FS prefer Blackjacks over Vindicators?  Sure.  But to refuse to buy Vindicators when they’re offered?  That just doesn’t sound plausible.
Sunrise is Coming.

All Hail First Prince Melissa Davion, the Patron Saint of the Regimental Combat Team, who cowed Dainmar Liao, created the Model Army, and rescued Robinson!  May her light ever guide the sons of the Suns, May our daughters ever endeavour to emulate her!

Tymers Realm

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1292
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #132 on: 21 November 2019, 15:27:37 »
Listen to the Tex Talks Battletech on the Catapult some time...
While "mostly" tongue-in-cheek, Military development and bureaucracy can be an unusual thing indeed.

grimlock1

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2087
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #133 on: 21 November 2019, 15:31:37 »
I have a hard time with that bit of fluff.  Mechs are in such great demand, and so readily salvaged, that I can’t see a state turning down a capable design like the Vindicator.  Davion kept building Cataphracts in captured factories, right?  When Kurita took Quentin, they kept building Victors and Atlases.  The Kell Hounds were fielding Panthers in the Warrior Trilogy.  (Ok, the way they talk about them suggests that Dan and Morgan consider driving a Panther a bit déclassé, but it’s still way better than being dispossessed.)  Would the FS prefer Blackjacks over Vindicators?  Sure.  But to refuse to buy Vindicators when they’re offered?  That just doesn’t sound plausible.
Like I said, stupidity.
I doubt the FS "refused" to buy Vindicators that were sitting on the lot.  I suspect it was more like reps from AFFS procurement were being treated to lunch by the manufacturer(can't recall the name right now), and a general explains that there's nothing wrong with the merlot from Paulding. Rather that he simply prefers the a merlot from Woodbine. And if he has to pay $600 a bottle, he's going to get the one he likes, even if it takes a bit longer. How long would it take to do something else with that Vindicator factory?

The Cataphracts were new designs.  There is interest in tearing those things apart to see if the Cappellans have done something new and innovative.   Once the investigators and test pilots spend a few months putting them through their paces and digging through all the paperwork at the factory, they went, "Oh!  Shiney!"  The fact that it wasn't a historically Capellan design probably helped.

As to the usual shuffle of "Factory world X changes hands for the Nth time in a century, just change all the labels in the cockpit and paint a new flag on the mech's shoulder."   That's a case of people  not being stupid.

The Kell Hounds running with Panthers was battlefield salvage by a group that did not yet have more resources than the average planet. They were mercs, either in time of war or in the run up.  In either case, it was before the Inner Sphere rediscovered mass production.

Listen to the Tex Talks Battletech on the Catapult some time...
While "mostly" tongue-in-cheek, Military development and bureaucracy can be an unusual thing indeed.
got a link handy?
I'm rarely right... Except when I am.  ---  Idle question.  What is the BV2 of dread?
Apollo's Law- if it needs Clan tech to make it useable, It doesn't deserve those resources in the first place.
Sure it isn't the most practical 'mech ever designed, but it's a hundred ton axe-murderer. If loving that is wrong I don't wanna be right.

Tymers Realm

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1292
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #134 on: 21 November 2019, 18:02:40 »
got a link handy?

I'll link the Playlist. While most of them are clean, language wise, there's the occasional f-bomb or the like and I'd rather not infer the Mod's wrath, if I don't have too...

As of this post, the Catapult vid is the sixth one on the playlist.

VhenRa

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2251
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #135 on: 21 November 2019, 22:36:08 »
Wow. Talk about in-universe bias.  The Blackjack's quad medium laser array is pretty good, but the paired AC/2's are a bit niche.  The two mechs have the same mobility and similar armor, yet I would say the Vindicator is probably the more flexible and generally useful of the two.  Yet the AFFS wanted nothing to do with them...  Neat bit of world building.

Oh, they only retooled for BJ-3s I believe, which legit is a superior design to a Vindicator.

And reading the book again... apparently it was more St. Ives turning their nose up at Vindicators, because their connotations with the Capellan state. I was misremembering FS/FC involvement.

grimlock1

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2087
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #136 on: 22 November 2019, 12:15:57 »
Not Invented Here . . . just think of the T-12- US designer got it built in Russia.
T-12... That was the one that put each road wheel on an arm and the arm had a torsion bar running the width of the tank, right?
I'm rarely right... Except when I am.  ---  Idle question.  What is the BV2 of dread?
Apollo's Law- if it needs Clan tech to make it useable, It doesn't deserve those resources in the first place.
Sure it isn't the most practical 'mech ever designed, but it's a hundred ton axe-murderer. If loving that is wrong I don't wanna be right.

misterpants

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 717
  • Bringing you the beats and grooves of Xin Sheng
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #137 on: 22 November 2019, 12:26:56 »
I misread "Blackjack" as "Bojack" in the title and my mind twisted onto itself.

"back in the 80s I was in a not-so-famous T-RO..."
Avatar by Blackjack Jones

Hellraiser

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13013
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #138 on: 24 November 2019, 17:20:46 »
I would point out that the Vindicator, while amazing on the table top, is not so amazing in universe.

It was seen as a filler unit for a nation that lacked a large # of heavy mech factories.

Its a Mid/Lower end medium in terms of weight & lacks any "specialty" other than "Generic Trooper".

Now on the table top it happens to do that AMAZINGLY well for its size, but in universe fluff doesn't always match table top performance.

Just look at the BJ fluff & its "Bad Rep",  but on the TT,  JJ & Quad Mediums in close or twin sniping from the longest ranged L1 weapon all mean its quite capable, which isn't something I would normally say about any other double AC toting design.


« Last Edit: 25 November 2019, 00:54:04 by Hellraiser »
3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers
3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves

"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47
Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25633
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #139 on: 24 November 2019, 18:08:57 »
And the FedSuns already had the Centurion and Enforcer, which both serve a similar role to the Vindicator.
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

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37059
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #140 on: 24 November 2019, 20:08:27 »
Back in college, the Vindicator was notoriously hard to kill.  And sadly, the Blackjack was just as underestimated as it is now.

VhenRa

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2251
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #141 on: 25 November 2019, 00:52:02 »
Vindicator admittedly does get screwed a little with the Battlemech Manual quirks.

Having no torso twist.

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25633
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #142 on: 25 November 2019, 01:02:41 »
I don't get how the Vindicator has that quirk.
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

Hellraiser

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13013
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #143 on: 01 December 2019, 20:19:22 »
I don't get how the Vindicator has that quirk.

Look at the TRO3025 picture.

Its a solid block torso, no "turret ring" like a lot of mechs have.

Though frankly if they do it to the Vindicator they need to do it to many of the other 40/45 ton mechs that have the same drawing style.  (Whitworth, Hermes-II, etc etc)

Basically 1/2 the mechs that were not "Battleoids" from Robotech
3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers
3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves

"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47
Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25633
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #144 on: 01 December 2019, 20:27:11 »
TBH, the lines look of 3025 really isn't detailed enough for me really say that it definitely doesn't. The 3050 and 3050 Upgrade art makes it look like it does.
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

drakensis

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1460
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #145 on: 02 December 2019, 03:07:38 »
Tex has just reviewed this beauty.
"It's national writing month, not national writing week and a half you jerk" - Consequences, 9th November 2018

Hellraiser

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13013
  • Cry Havoc and Unleash the Gods of Fiat.
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #146 on: 02 December 2019, 11:31:13 »
TBH, the lines look of 3025 really isn't detailed enough for me really say that it definitely doesn't. The 3050 and 3050 Upgrade art makes it look like it does.


Isn't this the 3050 pic?   Still no torso ring.

https://www.google.com/search?q=vindicator+sarna&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjp4b3-sJfmAhVQop4KHaVkBjwQsAR6BAgKEAE&biw=2134&bih=1023#imgrc=0EHfuhoKSwhf-M

3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers
3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves

"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47
Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo

SteelRaven

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9545
  • Fight for something or Die for nothing
    • The Steel-Raven at DeviantArt
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #147 on: 02 December 2019, 12:17:31 »
Tex has just reviewed this beauty.

Yes, Tex is back and all is right with the universe. I do love his take on the history of GM within the BTU leading up to the first Blackjack.
Battletech Art and Commissions
http://steel-raven.deviantart.com

MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 25633
  • It's just my goth phase
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #148 on: 02 December 2019, 13:23:25 »
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

Tymers Realm

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1292
Re: MotW: Blackjack
« Reply #149 on: 02 December 2019, 13:47:33 »
Tex has just reviewed this beauty.

And more Duncan Fisher, well..., being Duncan Fisher...  Fireballing a horse? Yea, he'd do that for sure...

Seems like Mr. Ledoux has enjoyed reviving that character thru the BPL.

And the GM rips and nods to the Marauder were a nice touch as well. When Tex & the BPL get around to doing the Marauder, that'll be a fun one...