Vehicles and Double Heat Sinks

[SCC]

Does any one have any idea what happens when you have a Vehicle that needs a new reactor and the only one you have on hand uses DHS?

[consequences]

These days reactors have to be customized to a specific unit type and tonnage, so any dhs equipped reactors wouldn't be something you could put in a vehicle anyway.

[Mattlov]

This constraint also helps keep the universe from breaking and making 'Mechs pointless.

[I am Belch II]

If tanks could have double heat sinks, it would make mechs pretty pointless. 1/2 the heat in custom weapons and see the stuff you can come up with.

[StCptMara]

If tanks could have double heat sinks, it would make mechs pretty pointless. 1/2 the heat in custom weapons and see the stuff you can come up with.

Could you imagine, for example, if you did not have to pay 5 extra tons to put a Heavy/ER PPC on a tank with a Fusion Engine?
It would actually make the Clan OmniTanks OP!

[Brother Jim]

'Mechs would not be pointless.

They are the only truly all terrain vehicle.

[TigerShark]

'Mechs would not be pointless.

They are the only truly all terrain vehicle.

No. That would be a VTOL. :) That one just plain ignores terrain.

[SCC]

I was only asking about the HS in the reactor: IE the ten (10) free ones that come with the power plant, not the rest (they would presumably stay single under the situation I've outlined)

[Greywind]

Except when forced to land...

[MadCapellan]

I was only asking about the HS in the reactor: IE the ten (10) free ones that come with the power plant, not the rest (they would presumably stay single under the situation I've outlined)

They'd have to be stripped and replaced with singles.  For whatever (good) reason, the rules say they're incompatible.  Maybe they need to catch the breeze between 'Mech's legs to work correctly?

[Lysenko]

No. That would be a VTOL. :) That one just plain ignores terrain.

I think not. To borrow a Hitler quote: "Those things go down quicker than a clanner on a first date." :D

ref: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK3pbyP-57A

On the engine, that's not so bad...BUT you can't mix SHS and DHS. (Unless something's changed in the past 20 years...I've not gone through the CG tech book yet; it's sitting on a shelf. :) )

[rlbell]

I was only asking about the HS in the reactor: IE the ten (10) free ones that come with the power plant, not the rest (they would presumably stay single under the situation I've outlined)

Vehicles never worried about heat from missiles and ballistic weapons.  Giving them even only ten DHS wouls allow them to mount some significant energy weapons, as well, for weapon suites that a comparable mech cannot mount use, so anywhere outside of terrain where combat vehicles cannot go, they can outgun mechs, even mechs that are bigger than them.  The Von Luckner is bad enough, but give it an XL and DHS and you can add 4 ERML's.

[Brother Jim]

I believe VTOL's need an atmosphere to operate, as do hovers. They don't work in a vacuum at all, but 'Mechs do.  'Mechs and subs are the only vehicles that work underwater.
That kind of thing.  >:D

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Actually, sealed tracked vehicles (like some of the variants seen in 3085 Old Is the New New) can also operate underwater.

[Jim1701]

Actually, sealed tracked vehicles (like some of the variants seen in 3085 Old Is the New New) can also operate underwater.

If they have a fusion engine I believe they can operate in a vacuum as well.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Yup.

Of course, vehicles still have a few limitations beyond not being able to mount DHS- look at the Schrek vs the AWS-8Q Awesome.  They've got the same mass, the same movement, and nearly the same number of heatsinks, but the Awesome still has the mass to mount twice the armor of the Schrek.  Even if the Awesome matched the Schrek's heatsinks it would still beat it on armor by a substantial 5.5 tons.

[TigerShark]

Yup.

Of course, vehicles still have a few limitations beyond not being able to mount DHS- look at the Schrek vs the AWS-8Q Awesome.  They've got the same mass, the same movement, and nearly the same number of heatsinks, but the Awesome still has the mass to mount twice the armor of the Schrek.  Even if the Awesome matched the Schrek's heatsinks it would still beat it on armor by a substantial 5.5 tons.

You're saying that the Schrek wouldn't have more armor if it mounted DHS and added 15 tons of armor..? I don't get it.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

No, I'm saying that all other things being equal, it looks like a mech will have more free tonnage than a vehicle.

[rlbell]

No, I'm saying that all other things being equal, it looks like a mech will have more free tonnage than a vehicle.

Not really, and not all the time.  An SRM carrier has 10 SRM6 and can fire them all each turn.  An inner sphere mech would need a total of forty heat sinks (or twenty DHS) to keep up the same barrage.  I am not sure that it can even be built on a mech chassis for the same mass as an SRM carrier.  Sure, a clan mech might cram 20 DHS and 10 SRM6 onto a 60t chassis that you would take into battle, but the clan equivalent of the SRM carrier is only 45t.

If you do not design, or field, mixed energy/ammo based designs, you do not always notice why vehicles with DHS threaten mechs.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

The SRM Carrier is also slower and much less armored than a similar mech would be.  And DHS are irrelevant to it because it doesn't track heat to begin with.  Adding DHS to vehicles would save a few tons on designs that mount energy weapon intensive loads, like the Morgan and Ontos, but you still can't design a tank to bracket fire or pull off a Black Hawk Prime's alpha strike without serious consessions elsewhere.

[rlbell]

The SRM Carrier is also slower and much less armored than a similar mech would be.  And DHS are irrelevant to it because it doesn't track heat to begin with.  Adding DHS to vehicles would save a few tons on designs that mount energy weapon intensive loads, like the Morgan and Ontos, but you still can't design a tank to bracket fire or pull off a Black Hawk Prime's alpha strike without serious consessions elsewhere.

I did not say that the SRM carrier was fast, or had a lot of armor, but that a 60t mech with the same technology base cannot be built with ten SRM6's if it must fire them at the same rate, at all.  With an XL engine and IS DHS, it may still be impossible to build a 60t mech that alphas ten SRM6's and stays heat neutral.  For a less extreme example, build a 60t mech, with 3025 tech and the speed and weapons fit of a Manticore.  It either bracket fires, or has less armor.  Bracket firing as a feature arises from the incapability of firing everything, so the weapons suite is designed to have long and short options.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Again, that's irrelevant to the argument about mounting DHS on vehicles.  The SRM Carrier is a hyper-extremist that devotes a higher percentage of its mass to firepower at the expense of armor and speed than an equivalently sized mech would in the first place.

Bracket firing doesn't arise from being incapable of packing on the heatsinks to fire a mech's long ranged weapons along with its short ranged ones, it's because it's often quite a bit more efficient to pack on a few more medium lasers or SRMs to use at close range, rather than to add more heatsinks, especially if there are other considerations like minimum range for PPCs and LRMs.

[I am Belch II]

I think the armor limit is the battlemechs problem. You cant put all the armor in the world on a tank as long as you have the tonnage. But even on a 100ton 2/3 mech, 19 tons of armor is it.

[SCC]

Tanks still have an armor limit, it's just higher then 'Mechs, 24.5 tons standard for a 100-ton tank

[ANS Kamas P81]

And with the right weapons you can crit a tank silly while a 'Mech would mostly ignore it (looking at you, infernos)

[SCC]

The only thing doesn't fear infernos is fire-resistant BA do that's not really a good example
And baring the side 8 hit Tanks don't REALLY have to worry about TAC's more then 'Mechs, a 12 is a turret crit, yes, but a 12 on a 'Mech is a head hit, which forces a conciseness role AND damages the MechWarrior, this in addition to hitting the least well armored part of the 'Mech, and the one that holds a lot of vulnerable equipment (cockpit, sensors and life support) while the first 3 turret crits are a joke

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Remember when you say "barring side 8 locations" that vehicles have a much bigger side arc than mechs and that with 2D6, there's roughly a 30% chance of rolling an 8.

There's also the Motive System Damage Roll, which typically results in vehicles being reduced to pathetic movement rates if they're not flat out immobilized in very short order, especially if they're taking fire from weapons that do lots of clusters of light damage, like LB-X ACs and SRM pods.

[SCC]

Ok, I hadn't noticed it was that bad before, but most CV only have secondaries on their sides, that and the 8 you should try and avoid having sides toward enemy
There's a reason I said the first three crits are a joke, one of them is this

Stabilizer: A vehicle’s weapon stabilizers help it fire straight
while moving. When this system takes a critical hit, double
the attacker movement modifier for all attacks from weapons
mounted in the location struck. Weapons mounted elsewhere
in the vehicle are not affected. Second and subsequent hits to
the stabilizer in the same location have no further effect.

[StCptMara]

Ok, I hadn't noticed it was that bad before, but most CV only have secondaries on their sides, that and the 8 you should try and avoid having sides toward enemy
There's a reason I said the first three crits are a joke, one of them is this

You don't move your vehicles? I do not consider that a joke..

[TigerShark]

One can debate endlessly the benefits and drawbacks of vehicles, but this thread is about Double Heat Sinks, specifically. Whether they take crits on the sides or not is irrelevant.