QuadVees

[FedComGirl]

Anything works.  Gamma shielding is (almost) exclusively a function of mass per unit area.  This makes it very easy to get good protection, but impossible to shave weight.

Cool. Thanks.

It is probably rolled into the engine mass.  'Mech engines do not have as much shielding because the cockpit has its own so combat vehicles need extra shielding to share the same engine types, but the support engines are a separate family which are not designed the same way 'Mech engines are.

Maybe?

Ooo, thanks. (Though I suspect that science fiction physics is involved for BattleTech engines.)

But...why are we even arguing this? We know 'Mech plants produce hard radiation when damaged; Grayson Carlyle died from it.

He did? Bummer. I read it was cancer. I didn't know if was from an engine going.

[ColBosch]

In The Dying Time - which is not a great book, sadly - it's stated that Grayson contracted cancer from exposure to damaged 'Mech engines. I seem to recall mention is also made that the Helm Core and the general rise in technology has reduced that risk, but he was exposed several times before then.

[AJC46]

just got my answer for my question on how quadvee's jump even in mech mode.

they jump like mechs even in vee mode so no motive risks they only take the same risks mechs do while jumping so this actually a another thing they have over vees their jumping doesn't involve motive risk.

[Col Toda]

Like proto mechs any new unit takes 3 years of trial an error to find it's niche in which it best works at . Then the cost effectiveness of the the new unit vs cheaper more numerous ones . Quantity is a quality all it's own you have to have a minimum number to get maximal results if the unit takes too much resources to field enough to make a difference what is the point . The reason I never saw more than one unit field LAMS is the interdisciplinary training of both the pilots and the techs are very hard even if you purposely train  them for that  maintenance . The overhead is insane . If I can field a lance of LAMS or  lance of mechs and 2 lances of Aerospace for the same resources I would do the latter.  The same will likely apply to QuadVees the best part of combat vehicles is the quality of tech required to maintain one is smaller than a mech a quadvee would have insane maintenance issues and will be harder to keep in fighting trim . Say you have after the second battle a maintenance shortfall so your quadVee  has a Critical or two before the fight .  The third fight you have to sideline one third to one half of the units to keep the rest in fighting trim  .  My unit is a little tech heavy and  after some heavy fighting I squeak by on not having maintenance short falls it would be impossible to do fielding LAMS as my techs are too specialised in maintaining one combat type of vehicle that it would require two  and that is one too many.

[Weirdo]

just got my answer for my question on how quadvee's jump even in mech mode.

they jump like mechs even in vee mode so no motive risks they only take the same risks mechs do while jumping so this actually a another thing they have over vees their jumping doesn't involve motive risk.

NOTHING involves motive risk for a QuadVee. To reduce the mobility of a QuadVee, you have to do it the same way as a 'mech: Blast through the armor, and crit leg actuators and/or tracks. The complete lack of a motive crit table is one of the greatest advantages QuadVees have over normal tanks, probably up there with the ability to use double heat sinks.

[Natasha Kerensky]

FYI... following up on some issues from earlier in the thread, I asked for some rules clarifications now that FM: 3145 is out.  See here:

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,33174.0.html

In short, Quadvees can be omnified, and they can carry mechanized battle armor.  But they cannot install infantry compartments.

FWIW...

[Maingunnery]

FYI... following up on some issues from earlier in the thread, I asked for some rules clarifications now that FM: 3145 is out.  See here:

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,33174.0.html

In short, Quadvees can be omnified, and they can carry mechanized battle armor.  But they cannot install infantry compartments.

FWIW...

Sweet. Now if could only get an hover version.  >:D

[Natasha Kerensky]

Sweet. Now if could only get an hover version.  >:D

I'd be happy with wheeled versions under 80 tons.

[FedComGirl]

In The Dying Time - which is not a great book, sadly - it's stated that Grayson contracted cancer from exposure to damaged 'Mech engines. I seem to recall mention is also made that the Helm Core and the general rise in technology has reduced that risk, but he was exposed several times before then.

Bummers. Thanks for the info.

FYI... following up on some issues from earlier in the thread, I asked for some rules clarifications now that FM: 3145 is out.  See here:

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,33174.0.html

In short, Quadvees can be omnified, and they can carry mechanized battle armor.  But they cannot install infantry compartments.

FWIW...

Cool!

I'd be happy with wheeled versions under 80 tons.

That'd be fun. :)

[Akalabeth]

also if the gyro is destroyed you still have a 180 arc with the torso slots in mech mode.

I don't know if the torso arcs differ from normal battlemech, but the torso arcs are typically 120' not 180'

[AJC46]

for quadvees their arcs are 360 for all torso slots according to the rules published in FM3145 getting your gyro wrecked reduces it to 180.

[Nebfer]

No problem. :)

We know they burn pure hydrogen so the boron reaction you mentioned is irrelevant.  That is very clearly stated in canon on many occasions, so it is just a matter of identifying the reaction and working from there.  That is really not that hard to do because the simple proton-proton chain cannot produce useful amounts of power, so you have to be using the CNO cycles.  These cycles do not produce neutrons which are annoyingly difficult to stop (at least in the main reactions), but they do throw out lots of hard gamma rays which are simple enough to deal with.

We also know that BT does not completely discard physics so the general reaction chains are fine, and it actually states that the K-F changes are in the behavior of exceedingly high energy plasmas which is exactly where you need some extra trick to reduce the size of a reactor.

I do not know from what I can see, Proton chain produces similar amounts of energy, producing 26.73 MeV, where as CNO is also 26.73 MeV, with the Proton chain being available at lower temperatures than CNO. Also From what I can tell CNO needs carbon, nitrogen and oxygen as well so thoughs would need to be added to the mix.

[Diablo48]

I do not know from what I can see, Proton chain produces similar amounts of energy, producing 26.73 MeV, where as CNO is also 26.73 MeV, with the Proton chain being available at lower temperatures than CNO. Also From what I can tell CNO needs carbon, nitrogen and oxygen as well so thoughs would need to be added to the mix.

It is not the energy per reaction (which is the same as it should be given that the heavier elements are just acting as catalysts), it is the reaction rate.  Proton chain reactions occur very slowly (this is why stars last so long), and if you increase the temperature and pressure to increase the rate then the CNO cycle takes over (this happens in supernovae).

Also, the reaction is perfectly capable of generating the heavier elements from hydrogen (this is where all heavier elements in the universe come from after all), although this would probably take an unacceptably long time in a reactor so it is probably easier to dope it with some (the exact elements do not even matter so long as they are close to/on the chain) to get things going.  On the bright side, you do not need much because all the catalytic nuclei are not consumed and CNO are all readily available in organic molecules and the atmosphere so you will not need to synthesize them.  One other interesting thing to note is that those secondary synthesis reactions will contribute some power to the reaction and might even be enough to allow you to exceed 100% hydrogen to helium efficiency, although I do not know enough about those secondary pathways to say anything for certain beyond the fact that they are exothermic and will happen to some extent at CNO (and especially hot CNO) temperatures/pressures.

[YingJanshi]

Um...as...interesting...as all that is...
Now that FM: 3145 has been out for a little while...has anyone actually played with these yet?

[verybad]

I'd be happy with a VTOL version 30 or under...No risk to motive components? OK :)

I think the best use for a QuadVee has got to be a 50-55 ton advanced jump jet equipped short range specialist (eg ER med lasers and targeting) They're undeniably tough, the ten percent penalty is troublesome, but with short range and good mobility, they could be really nasty.

[CloaknDagger]

I think the best use for a QuadVee has got to be a 50-55 ton advanced jump jet equipped short range specialist (eg ER med lasers and targeting) They're undeniably tough, the ten percent penalty is troublesome, but with short range and good mobility, they could be really nasty.

20% penalty.

[glitterboy2098]

I'd be happy with a VTOL version 30 or under...No risk to motive components? OK :)

you mean LAM's?   :D

VTOl quadvee.. a mech that converts to a low altitude flying unit.
LAM.. a mech that converts to a low altitude flying unit, or a high altitude flying unit.

[verybad]

20% penalty.

Ohh didn't see the Tracks extra weight bit, sneaky bastards aren't they!

So yeah, too much penalty weight for the small benefits, I got nothin'.

[verybad]

you mean LAM's?   :D

Yeah but whirly bird LAMs that spin their hands around to get in the air.

[Wrangler]

Why not have it convert into a WiGE instead.  8)

[Arkansas Warrior]

Because that is exactly what LAMs do?

[SCC]

I'd be happy with a VTOL version 30 or under...No risk to motive components? OK :)

I think the best use for a QuadVee has got to be a 50-55 ton advanced jump jet equipped short range specialist (eg ER med lasers and targeting) They're undeniably tough, the ten percent penalty is troublesome, but with short range and good mobility, they could be really nasty.

Current QuadVess can still take damage to their tracks, can't they? (It would be rather if they didn't and I'm pretty sure people have said they do)

That means that a QuadVee that turns into a VTOL can still take rotor hits movement penalties and this would have to be an actual hit location.

One that can be targeted by a TarComp

One that when destroyed causes a unit that is using it to move (Generating VTOL MP) to be AUTOMATICALLY removed from play

[Istal_Devalis]

No, QuadVee's dont take motive hits at all.
You treat a QuadVee as a mech when it comes to damage.

[Weirdo]

Current QuadVess can still take damage to their tracks, can't they? (It would be rather if they didn't and I'm pretty sure people have said they do)

Only through actual critical hits. They never take motive hits.

One that when destroyed causes a unit that is using it to move (Generating VTOL MP) to be AUTOMATICALLY removed from play

What on/off earth are you talking about? No seriously, I gotta know where you get your information for these things.

[YingJanshi]

Guess he just takes VTOLs with destroyed rotors out of the game instead of having them crash. At least, what it sounds like...

[SCC]

Last time I checked the errata that's what happens, or at least functionally. If I remember correctly they do crash and are destroyed but don't actually take damage

[Weirdo]

Last time I checked the errata that's what happens, or at least functionally. If I remember correctly they do crash and are destroyed but don't actually take damage

Long story short: No.

Short story long: This.

[SCC]

OK, I've found the errata I was referring to before, here it is: "A vehicle is considered destroyed and out of the game when all of its internal structure circles in one location (including
the turret, if any) are marked off, or when its Critical Hit Effects indicates that it is destroyed.” Note how VTOL rotors are no longer excluded? When the rotors are destroyed so is the unit, it can no longer take any damage

[Weirdo]

Okay, this one's really recent, so I'll give you a bye on it this time.

[SCC]

Weirdo, that quote is from the 4.01 errata, page 6, maybe not the most recent one, but it doesn't sound like things changed in 4.01 that is currently up but it was a big change from what was before.

Before when a VTOL's rotors where destroyed it simply crashed, now the VTOL is destroyed (Or at least I'm pretty sure it is)