Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
The Inner Sphere / Re: The Hidden 5 and other lost worlds.
« Last post by SCC on Today at 21:56:59 »
Interconnectedness Unlimited also/later earlier on created a reusable super-jump drive with a more limited range.  But IIRC, it was prohibitively expensive and never got beyond a single prototype.
FTFY, Interconnectedness Unlimited and their Super-Jump Drive date back to the original House Davion sourcebook from '88 and 3025
Ground Combat / Re: Melding some later tech into 3025 era games
« Last post by SCC on Today at 21:51:57 »
I'd add Narc ammo for LRMs/SRMs but not Narc Launchers so it's normally useless, but if you manage to smuggle beacons inside the enemies ammo supply or something ...
One thing to take into account is limitations on the FTL system.  For example, nBSG had the capability for a ship to jump into orbit and start dropping nukes, with little or no warning.  If you have an FTL system that lets people pop into orbit over a planet, then the goal of planet-based people should be to get a ship so they are no longer a potential target.
BT already has this, what do you think jumping in at the planet/moon L1 point is?

There could be more than one FTL drive or technique in BT as long as they all obeyed the same stellar proximity limits and planetary pirate point limitations as jump drives.  As long as FTL drives cannot zip or blink around inside a solar system, there's not much impact on BT play. 

At the level of the BT universe, I suppose a non-instantaneous FTL drive would put its faction at some disadvantage versus factions with the BT jump drive due to slower travel and response times.  That could affect multi-planet campaigns, economies, balance-of-power, and such.

But if both types of FTL drives still have to send in the dropships once they arrive in-system, it's not going to change most planetary assaults or raids.

Traveller had a system where you needed fuel to travel X distance (measured in parsecs, 1-6), plus you could only arrive up to 100 diameters to the target body.  You could arrive farther, but that 100 diameters was the minimum range.  This allowed for there to be front lines in a space war, and made supply lines close enough that any attackers and defenders had to deal with potential raids.

I don't recall those specific rules, but conceptually, I loved Traveller's Stutterwarp Drive.  The macro-scale electron tunneling had the whiff of scientific reality.  The drive's need to discharge was a good strategic limitation.  And the drive slowing to sub-light speeds inside gravity wells was a good tactical limitation, allowing for very high-speed, but still causal, space combat.

Not to knock jumpships and dropships, but stutterwarp remains my favorite FTL concept.  I wish it had been incorporated into a more popular/better sustained scifi setting/combat system.
Aerospace Combat / Re: Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Last post by idea weenie on Today at 21:29:07 »
The NewGrange is the difference between having a Warship that can jump back for full repairs, and a Warship that must be abandoned due to damaged seals on the KF core.  A newGRange also would allow construction of a non-jumpable station on-site, using the full NewGrange's machine shops and assembly bays to speed up construction.

That would be some interesting rules, where a station would have a construction and cost multiplier based on what was being used to build it.  I.e. a space station built in orbit over a House Capital should be fairly easy, while a space station built over an uninhabited planet would have to be transported to the location (i.e. traveling to and from the Jump point), and would have to either assemble itself (similar to the ISS, where a single habitable location is built first, and the engineers/technicians assemble more components out of what is also provided), or have another vessel help out (i.e. a NewGrange class).  The NewGrange would have its on-board machine shops that would provide benefits to construction rate (it can build the necessary components out of basic materials instead of needing final products in cargo bays).  This would of course require a change to the Space Station cost multiplier (instead of *5 overall; it would have a base price, multiplied by situational effects).

But you are right, having a droppable 50 kton space station that just acted as a gantry, with cargo bays for repair materials would be a much better solution.
Aerospace Combat / Is the Newgrange a flawed concept?
« Last post by Korzon77 on Today at 21:18:39 »
Ok, the Newgranges were very impressive, but I'm wondering--where they fatally flawed?

The reason is simple--the Newgrange can repair a warship. But in doing so, it becomes completely immobile due to KF interactions and thus needs complete space supremacy--not superiority, but supremacy. At the same time, it is a vital strategic target. 
It would seem that a better design would be a large repair ship that erected a frame (possibly transported by dropship/spacestation that was carried via drop collar) around the ship to be repaired, tht would function as an unpressurized bay.

Granted, erecting the frame would take more time, but it would also leave the repair ship free to escape if an attack occurred, thus savihg the far more valuable repair ship.

It seems that the Star League never even considered this flaw--likely because before Amaris, there was nobody who could challenge them.
Fan Articles / Re: Tell me about the....LTV4
« Last post by Liam's Ghost on Today at 21:10:56 »
It can be found in XTRO:Primitives volume II, despite it not being a primitive vehicle itself.

It's pretty handy, but a little thin skinned because of how much mass that PPC and heatsinks use up. 24 points up front, 16 everywhere else. Since hovertanks tend to be so easy to immobilize, that's not necessarily as bad as it might seem, but still, you're probably best off keeping your distance and sniping with the PPC.
BattleMechs / Re: MotW Workshop: Spartan
« Last post by lucho on Today at 21:03:20 »
For an even more BattleMaster-style Spartan, I would keep the 400 XL, go with 12 DHS's, give it endo-steel, drop the MPL's for a trio of standard medium lasers in each arm, along with 2 machine guns in each arm. Drop a ton of AMS ammo for a half ton of machine gun ammo. Switch out the Streak-2's for standard SRM-4's (ton ammo each), and keep all ammo in the right torso with CASE. In the left torso, keep the ER PPC and TAG, but add a Guardian ECM Suite...Increase leg armor to give the 'Mech 232 pts of standard armor...

That means when you're up close, you have 6 medium lasers, 2 SRM-4's and 4 machine guns with only movement heat...


Interesting idea; it lacks the Spartan's accuracy but makes up for it with raw punch  :o
Clan Chatterweb / Re: What would you bid to take this planet?
« Last post by Liam's Ghost on Today at 21:02:27 »
It's six oclock on the west coast, I'm calling the bidding closed.

Colt Ward's Bid of 2 stars of mechs and one star of elementals currently stands as lowest, so unless I blew reading comprehension, I declare his bid the winner.

Thanks all for your participation.
Fan Articles / Tell me about the....LTV4
« Last post by mutantsix on Today at 20:57:56 »
I'm looking for a lance of cavalry hover tanks for SW period merc unit and these seem ideal. From what I can tell from MUL is they move 7/11 and with 5.5 tons of armour with a PPC/SRM4 in a turret.

If you look at contemporaries like the condor/drillson this seems like a good tank.


I can't seem to find a record sheet for it though apart from the old FASA Record Sheet Vol 5 so not sure how the armour is laid out.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10