Vehicles and Double Heat Sinks

[Minemech]

I firmly feel that vehicles should always play second fiddle to 'Mechs.  Yes, I'm the guy that plays MM with Vee Effectiveness optional rule off and direct blow rules on.

In reality, there is absolutely no reason that tanks wouldn't be exponentially more powerful and sensible than 'Mechs.  But I didn't get drawn into BattleTech for the reality of it, I came for the stompy 'Mechs.  Tanks being almost as effective as 'Mechs just kills it for me.  I mean, if they're THAT good, and THAT much cheaper, why not just use them exclusively?  The terrain thing sort of makes sense, but I prefer 'Mechs to be far more survivable as well.  This solidifies their place at the top of the food chain, and makes playing with them fun.  Likewise, it makes campaigns dealing with combat vees as secondary units or opfor militia interesting.

I have a different thought that leads to the same conclusion. The ballistic weapon advantage vehicles have gives them a beautiful character, why make them more like mechs? In double blind games they can be quite frightfully efficient. Besides those of us who have dealt with SRM carriers do not want to see Ontos superupgrades.

[Sockmonkey]

Kanga

Technically that was a hovercraft.

[Greywind]

A hover tank. Still jumped.

[Greyhind]

So did the Hephaestus and Leaping Lizzie (IIRC). None of the jumping tanks were fluffed as major successes.

[Greywind]

Maybe not, but it can still jump chasms.

[Khymerion]

So did the Hephaestus and Leaping Lizzie (IIRC). None of the jumping tanks were fluffed as major successes.

But fluff and actual use rarely ever line up.

[Greyhind]

In actual use, I'd prefer something that isn't going to stop after three one point hits. YMMV.

Regardless, all the examples are historical and thus irrelevant in the currant time period.