Filling in the Syberian AutoMechs (Open Thread)

[idea weenie]

Baseball gloves are safety equipment, yeah. For humans. Do you think they're there for dexterity? Catching a line drive bare-handed is gonna HURT, man! But BattleMechs do not get hurt the same way. For BattleMechs, your armor is all the safety gear you need.

...

Wasn't this thread supposed to be about Syberian AutoMechs?

- Herb

A metal glove to catch stuff would still be useful for a Mech.  Better the chunk of metal takes the impact than the Mech's own fingers.  Design it using rules similar to Handheld weapons, where it is just a chunk of armor.  If the 'Mitt' takes enough damage to make it useless the Mech can drop it and grab a new one, instead of needing time in a repair bay for its own actuators.  There will be a penalty since the Mech has to handle an off-center catch.

[HABeas2]

A metal glove to catch stuff would still be useful for a Mech.  Better the chunk of metal takes the impact than the Mech's own fingers.  Design it using rules similar to Handheld weapons, where it is just a chunk of armor.  If the 'Mitt' takes enough damage to make it useless the Mech can drop it and grab a new one, instead of needing time in a repair bay for its own actuators.  There will be a penalty since the Mech has to handle an off-center catch.

As tempting an idea as that sounds, the big issue is that what constitutes a hand actuator can vary wildly with the artist's style. Some Mechs have giant mitts, some have pincer claws, and then there's that "mace-fist" the Awesome has. We also have the claw physical combat weapon, which is a hand actuator that's been tweaked to deal more damage and have a superior grip, or some such. Rather than deal with WYSIWYG-inspired rules on what kind of hands can and cannot catch things and how, I just wrote the catching rules as generically as possible. An artist can just as easily create a hand actuator style to look like a catcher's mitt, and the way I see it, so can any tech with some spare sheet metal and a welding torch.

But, again, that's me. I don't have exclusive claim to what constitutes "fun."

- Herb

[HABeas2]

...In the meantime, here's my first swing (baseball pun!) at a TRO (by way of IE reporting) for Syberian AutoMechs:

Beetle (Wheeled AutoMech)


Summary
The Beetle class is an example of a “ground scout” model, primarily used for eyes-on recon and message courier duty, with good ground speeds and a five-ton max weapons load. The AutoBoP forces appear to have exclusive access to this chassis type, as all positively identified Beetles have been sighted in their ranks only. In ’Mech form, most Beetles strongly resemble the Lyran-made Commando, with subtle cosmetic differences likely incorporated for ease of passive identification and differentiation. But their wheeled vehicular modes differ across distinct functionality classes that we have designated as “Common,” “Striker,” and “Communicator.” Common-configuration Beetles resemble civilian vehicles in much the same way as did the Star League’s Rotunda. Striker-configured Beetles, by comparison, look more like wheeled missile batteries akin to the modern Light SRM Carrier. Communicator-configured Beetles, meanwhile, more closely resemble rolling satellite uplink scouts like the classic Swift Winds of old.

Oddly enough, the notable Beetles we’ve observed do not always possess skills or temperament consistent with their configurations. Likely a result of their seemingly randomized personality programming, we have witnessed some Common-style Beetles performing reconnaissance, while others act more like foot soldiers, while some Striker-style Beetles have been acting more like pathfinders than fire support units. A quick summary of several selected Beetles is included to illustrate this point.

Type: Beetle
Technology Base: Syberian (Experimental)
Tonnage: 35

Equipment                        Mass
Internal Structure:                  3.5
Conversion Eqpt:   Wheeled      5.5
Engine:    210      9
   Walking MP:    6
   Running MP:    9
   Jumping MP:    0
   Wheeled Cruise MP:   7
   Wheeled Flank MP:   11
Heat Sinks (Double):    10 [20]   0
Gyro:                                 3
Cockpit:                                 3
Armor Factor:              96               6
      Internal   Armor
      Structure   Value
   Head                    3   9
   Center Torso           11   12
   Center Torso (rear)      7
   R/L Torso             8   10
   R/L Torso (rear)              5
   R/L Arms                   6   9
   R/L Rear Legs           8   10

Fixed Components   Location   Critical   Tonnage
Wheels                RA/RL/LA/LL    4   0

Weapons and Ammo   Location   Critical   Tonnage
Common Configuration A
ER Large Laser             RA       2   5

Common Configuration B
Medium Laser                RA           1   1
Small Laser                  RA        1   0.5
Streak SRM 2               RT        1   1.5
Ammo (SRM) 50           RT       1   1
Medium Laser                   LA           1   1

Striker Configuration A
Primitive RL-15             RA        2   1
Medium Pulse Laser       RA        1   2
Primitive RL-15              LA       2   1
Medium Laser               LA       1   1

Striker Configuration B
Primitive RL-10             RA       2   0.5
Medium Laser               RA       1   1
Jump Jets                    RT        2   1
Primitive RL-10             LA        2   0.5
Medium Laser               LA       1   1
Jump Jets                    LT       2   1

Communicator Configuration A
Small Laser                   RA       1   0.5
Communications Eqpt.   RT       3   3
Beagle Active Probe      LT       2   1.5

Communicator Configuration B
Communications Eqpt.   RT        3   3
Medium Pulse Laser       LA       1   2

Notes: Features the following Design Quirks: Illegal (Syberian Robotics AI, BattleMech/Wheeled Vehicle Conversion), Ubiquitous (Syberia), Jettison-Capable Weapons (Hands).

Notable Beetles:
Beetle Type           Config.           Function      Skill Grade   Skill Set               ’Mech/Vehicle Form
Beetle Bee       Common (A)   ReconMech   Vet (2/1)     Scout                   Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Charger      Common (A)   ArtilleryMech   Vet (3/2)     Infantry               Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Jumper      Common (B)   ArtilleryMech   Vet (3/2)     Infantry                Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Tailer         Common (A)   ReconMech   Grn (5/4)     Scout                   Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Wheeler      Common (*)   NinjaMech    Vet (3/0)     Infantry-AntiMech   Commando/Rotunda
Metro-Scamp        Common (B)   ReconMech   Reg (3/2)     Scout                   Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Gear          Striker (B)   SpecMech    Vet (2/1)     Special Forces      Commando/Light SRM
Beetle Swerver      Striker (A)   Explorer       Reg (7/4)     Planet Surveyor     Commando/Light SRM
Beach Beetle        Comms (A)   Explorer       AbAvg (6/3)   Planet Surveyor    Commando/Swift Wind
Sandstormer-One   Comms (B)   ReconMech   Reg (3/2)     Scout                   Commando/Swift Wind
   
*This AutoMech mounts a peculiar weapon load: 1 Narc Missile Beacon launcher (RA, w/ 2t Ammo), and 1 Spot Welder (LA).

[RifleMech]

As do I. Since my calcs have the 3B/1 arquebus and the 1B/3D dart gun at the same damage value. I can only shrug.

Actually... I didn't drop the damage values due to range. My formulas use muzzle velocities only for range. ..

Yeah, but you implied it was less than 0. That said, I ended up putting it at 1 anyway, because less than 1 was ridiculous to me. Remember, BTW, this was based on calcs that were meant to compute black powder guns relative to BAR 3 armor values, then readjusted for a BAR 10 world. ... Hmmm. You know, that might be where I erred. I set its AP value then and there, with its damage vs BAR 3 vehicular armor. But this is an infantry rifle, not a cannon, and its intended targets are generally more lightly armored...so an AP of 2B *IS* more likely. Then, following the "damage magnifying" effect of hitting something under the armor threshold approach, that 0.05 damage vs BAR 3 armor becomes 1.05 vs BAR 2--but, again, we halve it because of the extreme reload time (at an average 20 seconds to complete a reload cycle, we'd be talking 1 shot every other turn OR we'd just have half the platoon fire when the other half loads. This is where I get the 1/2 modifier from.) That gives a final shot value of 0.525. Multiplying THIS by the 6 times that happens when one is shot at tactical scale vs AToW scale, we get 3.15, which rounds down to 3. And we do NOT have to adjust for BAR 10, because that's covered in other rules (which would drop the whole platoon's attack down after they fired). We wind up at a 2B/3 weapon, with a +2 to-hit modifier per attack to cover inaccuracy (I'm too lazy for +1/+2/+3, so I'm averaging it out). Which is what it seems you wanted to see, so... Huh!

Well, as we see above, I end up agreeing with you, just via different means.

Maybe how it was originally written was confusing?

I'm still not understanding why the damage is halved do to rate of fire. No other infantry weapon, including field guns and field artillery has their damage halved when they fire every other turn. 2B/3 is a lot better. They just have a very slow rate of fire and aren't that accurate at range.

Hmmm. Guess we'll see what happens when it comes up again in a product, because it seems numerous recent tweaks have left the equivalency tables pretty messed up, and I may just do away with equivalency entirely because it's too much hassle.

They've been tweaked more? Maybe open up equivalency to include other weapons?

Not how I'd do it, but hey, your table, your rules.

I know. I like big vehicles too. But Blaster can't carry them.

The Syberian AutoMechs aren't nullifying Transformers because we're using BT rules to mimic them, in their image, but with BT rules. If we used BT rules to mimic CritterkTek--which already uses BT rules verbatim--we just get a furry costume change. So, if we were to add anything to CritterTek, while remaining faithful to its image, we'd be replaying the Helm Core recovery and the recovery of Star League tech up to the coming of the Clans. It adds nothing to the rules we don't already have from BattleTech. You can play up the lore, but the conversion rate is 1:1.

I don't know. I think they could be mimicked without being exact. Things are changed with AutoMechs. Not so much that the feel is lost but there are changes. 

Baseball gloves are safety equipment, yeah. For humans. Do you think they're there for dexterity? Catching a line drive bare-handed is gonna HURT, man! But BattleMechs do not get hurt the same way. For BattleMechs, your armor is all the safety gear you need.

Yeah, those players from way back were pretty amazing as that's how they played. Bare-handed, with broken fingers. I was thinking about how much bigger a glove is compared to a hand and how it can still catch the ball even when it's past where your fingers are inside of it.

...

Wasn't this thread supposed to be about Syberian AutoMechs?

- Herb

We are talking about a couple of the cassettes. Only they wouldn't be cassettes but non-converting drones but same idea. Big AutoMech carries and deploys several little AutoMechs.

...In the meantime, here's my first swing (baseball pun!) at a TRO (by way of IE reporting) for Syberian AutoMechs:

Beetle (Wheeled AutoMech)


(snip)

Very way cool!  :thumbsup:  :rockon::clap: :beer:

[RifleMech]

The formula in the Companion is still current with your errata for Burst factor, Herb.

There has been an odd change to infantry platoon construction recently.  The change only affects a handful of weapons when they are used in a primary vice secondary role.  Anything that does over 0.6 damage is limited to 0.6 but gains the Heavy Burst special.  Given that all of the affected weapons from Tech Manual get over 0.6 via underbarrel grenade launchers, this is really strange.  A couple of the cool Sniper Rifles from Shrapnel #1 get there with huge caliber, but get Heavy Burst anyway too.  In both cases, the most affected factions are those with large squad sizes (Taurians, et al.).

It is an odd change. Of course how infantry are treated is odd so I guess it fits.  :-\

A metal glove to catch stuff would still be useful for a Mech.  Better the chunk of metal takes the impact than the Mech's own fingers.  Design it using rules similar to Handheld weapons, where it is just a chunk of armor.  If the 'Mitt' takes enough damage to make it useless the Mech can drop it and grab a new one, instead of needing time in a repair bay for its own actuators.  There will be a penalty since the Mech has to handle an off-center catch.

I was thinking something more like the Claw only it aids in catching, maybe carrying, but picking up and physical attacks suffer penalties. But I need to read Noisiel to see what's in it.

[Daryk]

Why did you remove the code tags, Herb?  It looked fine before...  ???

[Wrangler]

Beetle class mech is pretty cool!  It's OmniMech or modular too.  Are the AutoMechs unable use melee weapon or is it because they've not been invented yet.  Like Dinobots swords and so forth.

[HABeas2]

Maybe how it was originally written was confusing?

Maybe.

I'm still not understanding why the damage is halved do to rate of fire. No other infantry weapon, including field guns and field artillery has their damage halved when they fire every other turn. 2B/3 is a lot better. They just have a very slow rate of fire and aren't that accurate at range.

Because of the scale of play and what we mean by a slow rate of fire. Field guns and arty, IIRC, are modern heavy weapons, which are just easier to track per platoon when firing. Their reload rate is basically 10 seconds between shots--a single BT turn, or 2 AToW turns. But muskets take twice as long as that for reloading--20 seconds, meaning 2 turns in BT, or 4 in AToW! If everyone fires together, we'd be ruling that they can only fire once every 3 rounds in BT. But in historical use, commanders got around this by alternating fire in formations, so that half the group could be firing, while the other half was reloading. Representing this with half-damage was the simplest way to enable this without giving everyone a combat tracker just for the musket guys.

They've been tweaked more? Maybe open up equivalency to include other weapons?

Yeah, they have. And the trouble with equivalency is that it's causing a false impression that the weapons are interchangeable, which I am now regretting. A better approach, I'm starting to realize, is to do away with equivalency and just give them secondary damage and range values.

I know. I like big vehicles too. But Blaster can't carry them.

He has plenty of other drones to play with.

I don't know. I think they could be mimicked without being exact. Things are changed with AutoMechs. Not so much that the feel is lost but there are changes.

Yes, but that's because the transforming aspect IS different to BT rules. LAMs are one thing, and QuadVees another, but Transformers can be damn near anything. Meanwhile, CritterTek was just...BattleTech. IMHO, changing how it plays in any way would be unnecessary and kind of pointless.

Why did you remove the code tags, Herb?  It looked fine before...  ???

When I first posted it like that, I noticed the fluff paragraphs became single lines of text you'd have to scroll to read. Is there a way to tell the code to word wrap?

Beetle class mech is pretty cool!  It's OmniMech or modular too.  Are the AutoMechs unable use melee weapon or is it because they've not been invented yet.  Like Dinobots swords and so forth.

I would say that all Syberian AutoMechs are basically semi-modular in nature, with bodies that have the Mercury's Modular Design quirk, and weapons that use the jettison-capable quirk. They're not true Omnis in nature, but they're old hats when it comes to reconfiguration.

As to melee weapons, those are one of the main exceptions to the Star League-tech-only rule (beyond the other exceptions that have now come up throughout this discussion, that is): For whatever reasons, the human Syberians came up with the whole gamut of physical combat weapons we know today, before they all got wiped out. Grimdark, for instance, had Spikes, a Large Vibrosword, and a Tail for physical attack weapons. (The vibrosword and tail were available in alternating modes, however; he could only use the sword in Mech mode, and the tail was available only in Beast mode.)

- Herb

[glitterboy2098]

Beetle class mech is pretty cool!  It's OmniMech or modular too.  Are the AutoMechs unable use melee weapon or is it because they've not been invented yet.  Like Dinobots swords and so forth.

the nebula california material estasblished that they had access to all of the mech melee weapons. it was the one callout from the otherwise "star league tech only" limitation.

[Daryk]

I think if you paste the text into Notepad, tell that program to word wrap, then copy and paste it back into the post, that will work.  I could be wrong...

[idea weenie]

As tempting an idea as that sounds, the big issue is that what constitutes a hand actuator can vary wildly with the artist's style. Some Mechs have giant mitts, some have pincer claws, and then there's that "mace-fist" the Awesome has. We also have the claw physical combat weapon, which is a hand actuator that's been tweaked to deal more damage and have a superior grip, or some such. Rather than deal with WYSIWYG-inspired rules on what kind of hands can and cannot catch things and how, I just wrote the catching rules as generically as possible. An artist can just as easily create a hand actuator style to look like a catcher's mitt, and the way I see it, so can any tech with some spare sheet metal and a welding torch.

But, again, that's me. I don't have exclusive claim to what constitutes "fun."

- Herb

Ah.  I was thinking 'expendable but clumsy catching surface' rather than modifying the hand actuator directly.  So you'd have the Mechs using a piece of metal to catch stuff when preventing damage to the Mech is a priority (and accepting the 'piloting' penalty), and using their hands to catch when preventing damage to the item being tossed is a priority (i.e. when Daniel had to be caught safely).

I was guessing any handed Mech could use its hands to catch (with any piloting penalties appropriate for that type of hand), but sometimes the Mech would prefer not to get damaged in the process so it uses an expendable metal surface, or something fancy like a cesta from jai alai to do the catching instead.

When I first posted it like that, I noticed the fluff paragraphs became single lines of text you'd have to scroll to read. Is there a way to tell the code to word wrap?

- Herb

Not directly, my idea would be to take the fluff out of the code, leave the stats in the code.  Something like this:

Beetle (Wheeled AutoMech)


Summary
The Beetle class is an example of a “ground scout” model, primarily used for eyes-on recon and message courier duty, with good ground speeds and a five-ton max weapons load. The AutoBoP forces appear to have exclusive access to this chassis type, as all positively identified Beetles have been sighted in their ranks only. In ’Mech form, most Beetles strongly resemble the Lyran-made Commando, with subtle cosmetic differences likely incorporated for ease of passive identification and differentiation. But their wheeled vehicular modes differ across distinct functionality classes that we have designated as “Common,” “Striker,” and “Communicator.” Common-configuration Beetles resemble civilian vehicles in much the same way as did the Star League’s Rotunda. Striker-configured Beetles, by comparison, look more like wheeled missile batteries akin to the modern Light SRM Carrier. Communicator-configured Beetles, meanwhile, more closely resemble rolling satellite uplink scouts like the classic Swift Winds of old.

Oddly enough, the notable Beetles we’ve observed do not always possess skills or temperament consistent with their configurations. Likely a result of their seemingly randomized personality programming, we have witnessed some Common-style Beetles performing reconnaissance, while others act more like foot soldiers, while some Striker-style Beetles have been acting more like pathfinders than fire support units. A quick summary of several selected Beetles is included to illustrate this point.

Code: [Select]

Type: [b]Beetle[/b]
Technology Base: Syberian (Experimental)
Tonnage: 35

[b]Equipment                Mass[/b]
Internal Structure:         3.5
Conversion Eqpt: Wheeled 5.5
Engine: 210 9
Walking MP: 6
Running MP: 9
Jumping MP: 0
Wheeled Cruise MP: 7
Wheeled Flank MP: 11
Heat Sinks (Double): 10 [20] 0
Gyro:                         3
Cockpit:                         3
Armor Factor:           96           6
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Head                  3 9
Center Torso         11 12
Center Torso (rear) 7
R/L Torso          8 10
R/L Torso (rear)         5
R/L Arms                 6 9
R/L Rear Legs         8 10

[b]Fixed Components Location Critical Tonnage[/b]
Wheels              RA/RL/LA/LL 4 0

[b]Weapons and Ammo Location Critical Tonnage
[/b][i]Common Configuration A[/i]
ER Large Laser          RA    2 5

[i]Common Configuration B[/i]
Medium Laser              RA         1 1
Small Laser                RA      1 0.5
Streak SRM 2            RT      1 1.5
Ammo (SRM) 50        RT    1 1
Medium Laser                 LA         1 1

[i]Striker Configuration A[/i]
Primitive RL-15          RA      2 1
Medium Pulse Laser    RA      1 2
Primitive RL-15            LA    2 1
Medium Laser            LA    1 1

[i]Striker Configuration B[/i]
Primitive RL-10          RA    2 0.5
Medium Laser            RA    1 1
Jump Jets                  RT      2 1
Primitive RL-10          LA      2 0.5
Medium Laser            LA    1 1
Jump Jets                  LT    2 1
[i]
Communicator Configuration A[/i]
Small Laser                RA    1 0.5
Communications Eqpt. RT    3 3
Beagle Active Probe    LT    2 1.5
[i]
Communicator Configuration B[/i]
Communications Eqpt. RT      3 3
Medium Pulse Laser    LA    1 2

[b]Notes:[/b] Features the following Design Quirks: Illegal (Syberian Robotics AI, BattleMech/Wheeled Vehicle Conversion), Ubiquitous (Syberia), Jettison-Capable Weapons (Hands).

[b]Notable Beetles:
Beetle Type        Config.         Function    Skill Grade Skill Set            ’Mech/Vehicle Form
[/b]Beetle Bee    Common (A) ReconMech Vet (2/1)  Scout                Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Charger    Common (A) ArtilleryMech Vet (3/2)  Infantry            Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Jumper    Common (B) ArtilleryMech Vet (3/2)  Infantry              Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Tailer      Common (A) ReconMech Grn (5/4)  Scout                Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Wheeler    Common (*) NinjaMech Vet (3/0)  Infantry-AntiMech Commando/Rotunda
Metro-Scamp      Common (B) ReconMech Reg (3/2)  Scout                Commando/Rotunda
Beetle Gear        Striker (B) SpecMech Vet (2/1)  Special Forces    Commando/Light SRM
Beetle Swerver    Striker (A) Explorer    Reg (7/4)  Planet Surveyor  Commando/Light SRM
Beach Beetle      Comms (A) Explorer    AbAvg (6/3) Planet Surveyor Commando/Swift Wind
Sandstormer-One Comms (B) ReconMech Reg (3/2)  Scout                Commando/Swift Wind

[size=8pt]*This AutoMech mounts a peculiar weapon load: 1 Narc Missile Beacon launcher (RA, w/ 2t Ammo), and 1 Spot Welder (LA).
[/size]


[RifleMech]

Maybe.

Because of the scale of play and what we mean by a slow rate of fire. Field guns and arty, IIRC, are modern heavy weapons, which are just easier to track per platoon when firing. Their reload rate is basically 10 seconds between shots--a single BT turn, or 2 AToW turns. But muskets take twice as long as that for reloading--20 seconds, meaning 2 turns in BT, or 4 in AToW! If everyone fires together, we'd be ruling that they can only fire once every 3 rounds in BT. But in historical use, commanders got around this by alternating fire in formations, so that half the group could be firing, while the other half was reloading. Representing this with half-damage was the simplest way to enable this without giving everyone a combat tracker just for the musket guys.

Ah...in that case why not just multiply by the number of troopers firing? 15 troopers fire x Y = Z damage. Next turn they reload and the other 15 troopers fire. Dividing the damage at the start negates the possibility of all 30 troopers firing at one time. Which you might want to happen.

Yeah, they have. And the trouble with equivalency is that it's causing a false impression that the weapons are interchangeable, which I am now regretting. A better approach, I'm starting to realize, is to do away with equivalency and just give them secondary damage and range values.

I suppose that could happen. I don't think they're interchangeable. Not in that an older weapon couldn't be used in place of a modern one but the older weapon isn't a newer weapon. I do think opening up the number of weapons would widen the range of weaponry. For example 120mm Howitzer being equivalent to a HVAC/5 while a 120mm Tank Cannon is equivalent to a LAC/5. But I suppose just listing BT ranges and damages would help prevent any confusion.  Would the -3 damage that Rifle Cannons have against BAR-8+ Armors work?

He has plenty of other drones to play with.

True but more variety can be fun. :)

Yes, but that's because the transforming aspect IS different to BT rules. LAMs are one thing, and QuadVees another, but Transformers can be damn near anything. Meanwhile, CritterTek was just...BattleTech. IMHO, changing how it plays in any way would be unnecessary and kind of pointless.

That's the thing though. It doesn't have to be exactly the same. Coil Springs for example could be changed to only work in the legs as their version Mechanical Jump Boosters. ACs could have their ranges flipped. The Cran's UACs could be twice as heavy and work more like a Gas Gun. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gast_gun
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gryazev-Shipunov_GSh-23 All kinds of changes could be made while keeping it furry.

As to melee weapons, those are one of the main exceptions to the Star League-tech-only rule (beyond the other exceptions that have now come up throughout this discussion, that is): For whatever reasons, the human Syberians came up with the whole gamut of physical combat weapons we know today, before they all got wiped out. Grimdark, for instance, had Spikes, a Large Vibrosword, and a Tail for physical attack weapons. (The vibrosword and tail were available in alternating modes, however; he could only use the sword in Mech mode, and the tail was available only in Beast mode.)

- Herb

I was wondering about Grimdark. Since the Syberians created extra legs and tails, would they have made jaws or pincers?  Also could different sized cockpits be used to make smarter or less smart Drones without resorting to remote control drones? If yes to both, then a Grimdark like AutoMech could bite and still breath fire.  Otherwise, it's cosmetics for the jaws.

[HABeas2]

Ah...in that case why not just multiply by the number of troopers firing? 15 troopers fire x Y = Z damage. Next turn they reload and the other 15 troopers fire. Dividing the damage at the start negates the possibility of all 30 troopers firing at one time. Which you might want to happen.

Then we're back to tracking off turns, but sure. I can't honestly care enough about cannon fodder this bad to deal with them any deeper than we've already come.

I suppose that could happen. I don't think they're interchangeable. Not in that an older weapon couldn't be used in place of a modern one but the older weapon isn't a newer weapon. I do think opening up the number of weapons would widen the range of weaponry. For example 120mm Howitzer being equivalent to a HVAC/5 while a 120mm Tank Cannon is equivalent to a LAC/5. But I suppose just listing BT ranges and damages would help prevent any confusion.  Would the -3 damage that Rifle Cannons have against BAR-8+ Armors work?

As you've already managed to convince me to do away with equivalency, I'd have to go back to the drawing board before I can answer any of that. Sorry.

I was wondering about Grimdark. Since the Syberians created extra legs and tails, would they have made jaws or pincers?  Also could different sized cockpits be used to make smarter or less smart Drones without resorting to remote control drones? If yes to both, then a Grimdark like AutoMech could bite and still breath fire.  Otherwise, it's cosmetics for the jaws.

Nah. Jaws won't count as limbs. And the rules were very specific on the cockpit types used. Small cockpits are out. Command consoles are iffy only because they are an add-on. So Grimdark can't actually bite, no.

-Herb

[RifleMech]

Then we're back to tracking off turns, but sure. I can't honestly care enough about cannon fodder this bad to deal with them any deeper than we've already come.

Well, we'd have to track turns anyway so...

As you've already managed to convince me to do away with equivalency, I'd have to go back to the drawing board before I can answer any of that. Sorry.

No worries. :)

Nah. Jaws won't count as limbs. And the rules were very specific on the cockpit types used. Small cockpits are out. Command consoles are iffy only because they are an add-on. So Grimdark can't actually bite, no.

-Herb

Ahh :(   

Thanks :)

[HABeas2]

Well, we'd have to track turns anyway so...

My approach would have eliminated that need entirely, but whatevs.

Ah.  I was thinking 'expendable but clumsy catching surface' rather than modifying the hand actuator directly.  So you'd have the Mechs using a piece of metal to catch stuff when preventing damage to the Mech is a priority (and accepting the 'piloting' penalty), and using their hands to catch when preventing damage to the item being tossed is a priority (i.e. when Daniel had to be caught safely).

I was guessing any handed Mech could use its hands to catch (with any piloting penalties appropriate for that type of hand), but sometimes the Mech would prefer not to get damaged in the process so it uses an expendable metal surface, or something fancy like a cesta from jai alai to do the catching instead.

I suppose, or even just a heavy layer of vulcanized rubber that slots over the existing hand, with maybe a powerful electromagnet, assuming the ball is ferrous enough. Makes it a lot easier to play catch, though some might complain that it's cheating. I guess I just occasionally hit a point where my mind says, "Do we really need to invent another thing with limited utility?"

...And then someone reminds me that I wrote the 1945 XTR....

Not directly, my idea would be to take the fluff out of the code, leave the stats in the code.  Something like this:

Good to know for later dates.

- Herb

[RifleMech]

My approach would have eliminated that need entirely, but whatevs.

It still could. It all depends. If you've just got the one platoon, then that'd be the way to go. If you've got more than one though, an entire platoon can fire while the other loads.

I suppose, or even just a heavy layer of vulcanized rubber that slots over the existing hand, with maybe a powerful electromagnet, assuming the ball is ferrous enough. Makes it a lot easier to play catch, though some might complain that it's cheating. I guess I just occasionally hit a point where my mind says, "Do we really need to invent another thing with limited utility?"

...And then someone reminds me that I wrote the 1945 XTR....

Which is very cool.  :thumbsup: :beer: It's one of my favorites.

[HABeas2]

I suppose that could happen. I don't think they're interchangeable. Not in that an older weapon couldn't be used in place of a modern one but the older weapon isn't a newer weapon. I do think opening up the number of weapons would widen the range of weaponry. For example 120mm Howitzer being equivalent to a HVAC/5 while a 120mm Tank Cannon is equivalent to a LAC/5. But I suppose just listing BT ranges and damages would help prevent any confusion.  Would the -3 damage that Rifle Cannons have against BAR-8+ Armors work?

Okay, I worked out a fix. Equivalency is gone. In its place will be formulae that reduce the weapon's damage and effective range based on the target's BAR over 6. No more debating which gun is "like" this other gun. It's kinda neat if I do say so myself; the 88mm cannon drops to less than half its damage, with its effective long range falling to about a third of its 1945 reach. The modern 120mm cannon drops to a 5-pt weapon with a 49-hex long range against a modern BattleMech, while Yamato's main guns may deal 20pt hits at ranges comparable to the Clan ER Large Laser. Might add Crit roll modifiers to the effect as well, to reflect a loss of penetration, but the approach I'd use wouldn't hurt WWII guns nearly as much as it would Black Powder weapons.

Either way, back to Syberians!

Here's the Streaker class!

Streaker (Wheeled AutoMech)

Summary
In our original surveys, a number of sweeping generalizations were made about the AutoMechs of Syberia, based on quick and rather limited observations of them in action. Among such generalizations was neglecting to take a more critical look at the capabilities of the various AutoMech units, and so a number of the units we saw ended up mis-identified with each other. The Streaker class is but one example of this, with named members of this base chassis type being misconstrued as Beetles, or VeeMechs. From this, one must admit that we have not given these AutoMechs enough credit for the more diversionary aspects of their convertibility; between the sheer variety of their configurations, color schemes, and alternate forms, it can be truly difficult to know what one of these machines is capable of to the next.

The Streakers are but one of four classes that we collectively referred to as VeeMechs, only to realize that each had a different mass and loadout base. So reminiscent of the classic Griffin class are they, with the mass and performance profiles to match, that we can’t help but conclude the Streaker was based directly on the older machine. Even its most common loadout matches that of its progenitor, complete with a detachable “pistol” weapon, and a distinctive, shoulder-mounted missile tube. Superior in armor and firepower to most Beetles, while running only slightly slower overland, Streakers appear play a role best described as a mix of recon support and front-line soldier

Code: [Select]

Type: Streaker
Technology Base: Syberian (Experimental)
Tonnage: 55

Equipment Mass
Internal Structure: 5.5
Conversion Eqpt: Wheeled 8.5
Engine: 275 15.5
Walking MP: 5
Running MP: 8
Jumping MP: 0
Wheeled Cruise MP: 6
Wheeled Flank MP: 9
Heat Sinks (Double): 10 [20] 0
Gyro: 3
Cockpit: 3
Armor Factor: 144 9
Internal Armor
Structure Value
Head 3 9
Center Torso 18 18
Center Torso (rear) 7
R/L Torso 13 18
R/L Torso (rear) 6
R/L Arms 9 14
R/L Rear Legs 13 17

Fixed Components Location Critical Tonnage
Wheels RA/RL/LA/LL 4 0

Weapons and Ammo Location Critical Tonnage
Common Configuration A
ER PPC RA 2 7
LRM 5 RT 1 2
Ammo (LRM) 24 RT 1 1
CASE RT 1 0.5

Common Configuration B
Snub-Nose PPC RA 2 6
Streak SRM-2 RT 1 1.5
Ammo (Streak) 50 RT 1 1
CASE RT 1 0.5
Streak SRM-2 LT 1 1.5

Scrambler Configuration A
ER Large Laser RA 2 5
Guardian ECM RT 2 1.5
Lift Hoist LA 3 3
TAG HD 1 1

Scrambler Configuration B
ER Large Laser RA 2 5
Flamer RT 1 0.5
Flamer LT 1 0.5
CASE LT 1 0.5
Narc Missile Beacon LA 2 3
Ammo (Narc) 6 LA 1 1

Maintainer Configuration
Fluid Gun RA 2 2
Ammo (Fluid) 20 RA 1 1
SRM-6 RT 2 3
Ammo (SRM) 15 RT 1 1
CASE RT 1 0.5
Fluid Gun LA 2 2
Ammo (Fluid) 20 LA 1 1

Notes: Features the following Design Quirks: Illegal (Syberian Robotics AI, BattleMech/Wheeled Vehicle Conversion). Battle Fists, Rugged (1), Ubiquitous (Syberia), Jettison-Capable Weapon (Right Hand)
Credit: Giovanni Blasini, for base chassis design

Notable Streakers:
Streaker Type Config. Function Skill Grade Skill Set ’Mech/Vehicle Form
Jazzy Scrambler (A) CommandMech Vet (2/1) Scout, Officer Griffin/Rotunda
Blue Streaker Common (B) ArtilleryMech Vet (3/2) Infantry Griffin/Rotunda
Smoke Streaker Common (A) ReconMech Reg (3/2) Scout Griffin/Rotunda
Prowler Common (B) ArtilleryMech Vet (3/2) Infantry Griffin/Rotunda
Sunny Streak Scrambler (B) ReconMech Grn (5/4) Scout Griffin/Rotunda
Street Streaker-P Common (A) NinjaMech Vet (3/0) Infantry-AntiMech Griffin/Rotunda
Metro-Scamp Scrambler (B) ReconMech Reg (3/2) Scout Griffin/Rotunda

Streak-Wiper Maintainer DoctorMech Reg (5/4) Technican-’Mech Griffin/Rotunda

- Herb

[I am Belch II]

Keep on making Automechs.
Would love to see a Perceptor because we all know that was our favorite one.

[HABeas2]

Keep on making Automechs.
Would love to see a Perceptor because we all know that was our favorite one.

I have him as a Sounder-class VeeMech, which makes him akin to Soundwave and Blaster, who--in this setting--have PackRat-like vehicle modes and (mostly) Thunderbolt-like Mech forms. So, yeah, he's on the list.

- Herb

[Giovanni Blasini]

Loving the new writeups, Herb.  :thumbsup:

[RifleMech]

Okay, I worked out a fix. Equivalency is gone. In its place will be formulae that reduce the weapon's damage and effective range based on the target's BAR over 6. No more debating which gun is "like" this other gun. It's kinda neat if I do say so myself; the 88mm cannon drops to less than half its damage, with its effective long range falling to about a third of its 1945 reach. The modern 120mm cannon drops to a 5-pt weapon with a 49-hex long range against a modern BattleMech, while Yamato's main guns may deal 20pt hits at ranges comparable to the Clan ER Large Laser. Might add Crit roll modifiers to the effect as well, to reflect a loss of penetration, but the approach I'd use wouldn't hurt WWII guns nearly as much as it would Black Powder weapons.

What's the fix? If the 8.8cm does less than half damage, how much damage do the smaller cannons do? 5 damage doesn't seem like a lot for a 120mm cannon but the range is great. I don't really expect Black Powder Weapons to do much damage, unless they're really big weapons. Considering how armor works though, I would think they'd do something. Not a lot but something. More than guys with clubs but less than those with WWI weapons.

Either way, back to Syberians!

:)

Here's the Streaker class!

Very cool!  :thumbsup:


Cassettes are limited to 2 tons, right?

I hope I did this right. It's been a while since I made a small support vehicle.

Grand Slammer is an example of an early Sybertonian remote drone used by Sound class AutoMech. Initially it functioned as a scout. It's small size and amphibious chassis allowed it to go places the larger Sounder class couldn't without risking being seen. As more sophisticated remote drones for the Sounders became available, the Grand Slammer's role changed to ambusher against and fire support for the newer drone models. How well they function in this roll is debatable however. The Grand Slammer.

Armed with a Heavy Recoilless Rifle, twin two-shot SRM packs and twin Grenade Launchers, and max of a half ton of armor, the Grand Slammer does not have the firepower or armor for a stand up fight against anything but another remote drone. As such it tries to get in the first shot and then use it's greater speed to get away.

The Grand Slammer's weaponry, meager though it is, does give it the flexibility to fire a variety of rounds in support of other drones. It can easily fire smoke or inferno rounds to conceal allied drone movement or block an enemy's advance. Still, most Syberian Factions have  replaced their Grand Slammer type drones with more sophisticated bipedal or quad drones. The few who continue to use them, so do in the supporting role.

Type: Vehicle Remote Drone      
Technology Base: Syberian   
Movement Type: Tracked      
Tonnage:   2 tons   
Battle Value:       
Equipment:              Mass
Internal Structure:       683
Engine Type:   Fusion       348
Cruising MP:   5   
Flank MP:           8   
Overdrive MP:   10   
Heat Sinks:        0
Control Equipment: Drone AI
           Seating (Pillion)      75
           Fire Control            13
Lift Equipment:      
Power Amplifier:      
Turret:      
Armor Factor:   8          504
                      Armor    
                 Value   
Front:   3   
R/L Side:   2/2   
Rear:   1   
Turret:   0   
   
Weapons and Ammo    Location   Mass
Heavy Recoilless Rifle   Front           60
Ammo (HRR) 20             -             80
SRM-2 Shot               Front        30
SRM-2 Shot               Front        30
Ammo (SRM) 4              -          40
Grenade Launcher      Front        5
Grenade Launcher      Front        5
Ammo (20) Grenades       -          9
Notes
armored and amphibious chassis mods 
hand held spotlights front

I forget, are they supposed to have Remote Operating Systems and Sensors too? I thought, no, but I don't remember. If yes, then it's back to the scribble pad.

[HABeas2]

What's the fix? If the 8.8cm does less than half damage, how much damage do the smaller cannons do? 5 damage doesn't seem like a lot for a 120mm cannon but the range is great. I don't really expect Black Powder Weapons to do much damage, unless they're really big weapons. Considering how armor works though, I would think they'd do something. Not a lot but something. More than guys with clubs but less than those with WWI weapons.

The fix is: Reduce damage by 20% and range by 25% for each level of BAR above 6. The reductions are applied to the new values for each level, so BAR 7 = 80% damage and 75% range of values vs BAR 6; vs BAR 8 = 80% damage and 75% range vs BAR 7 values; vs BAR 9 = 80% damage and 75% range vs BAR 8; and vs BAR 10 = 80% damage and 75% range vs BAR 9. Black Powder guns begin these reductions for each BAR above 3, and so they suffer through 7 layers of similar reductions by the time they hit BAR 10. Use normal rounding for all values, to minimum values of 0. (0-damage weapons at BAR 10 are possible, but not very likely.)

Damage from physical attacks (such as ramming), and nuclear weapons are not reduced by BAR. Artillery and Minimum ranges, when given, are not affected by BAR. (It is therefore possible to see weapons reduced in effective range to a point where their Minimum range modifiers overlap across multiple range brackets.)

Some fun examples:
64-pound Black Powder Cannon (vs BAR 3): 16 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/22/43/65/173
64-pound Black Powder Cannon (vs BAR 10): 3 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/3/6/9/23
--
16-inch Naval Gun (vs. BAR 5-6): 40A   damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/25/50/75/200
16-inch Naval Gun (vs. BAR 10): 16A damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/8/16/24/63
--
125mm Smoothbore Tank Cannon (vs. BAR 5-6): 12 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 11/56/113/168/280
125mm Smoothbore Tank Cannon (vs. BAR 10): 5 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 11/18/36/53/89
--
30mm Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 5-6): 3 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/23/45/68/180
30mm Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 10): 1 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/7/14/22/57
--
30mm Gatling Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 5-6): 11 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/35/71/105/175
30mm Gatling Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 10): 5 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/11/22/33/55
--
.50 cal (U.S. [1945]) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 5-6): 2 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/15/29/44/145
.50 cal (U.S. [1945]) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 10): 1 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/5/9/14/46
--
7.62mm (European) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 5-6): 1 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/14/28/40/135
7.62mm (European) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 10): 0 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/4/9/13/43

Cassettes are limited to 2 tons, right?

If you're building them as robotic battle armor, yeah, but you can build the non-BA cassettes bigger.

I hope I did this right. It's been a while since I made a small support vehicle.
<snip>
I forget, are they supposed to have Remote Operating Systems and Sensors too? I thought, no, but I don't remember. If yes, then it's back to the scribble pad.

A quick review of your figures tells me you got it pretty much spot-on. Below 10-tons, robotics doesn't add any extra weight to a vehicle's control systems, and the Syberian version of AI is actually smaller in that they can fit their version inside a standard 3-ton  'Mech cockpit, so I think your control systems are fine. I was briefly worried you might have exceeded the vehicle's equipment slot  allowance, but you were even ok there. Nice job!

- Herb

[RifleMech]

The fix is: Reduce damage by 20% and range by 25% for each level of BAR above 6. The reductions are applied to the new values for each level, so BAR 7 = 80% damage and 75% range of values vs BAR 6; vs BAR 8 = 80% damage and 75% range vs BAR 7 values; vs BAR 9 = 80% damage and 75% range vs BAR 8; and vs BAR 10 = 80% damage and 75% range vs BAR 9. Black Powder guns begin these reductions for each BAR above 3, and so they suffer through 7 layers of similar reductions by the time they hit BAR 10. Use normal rounding for all values, to minimum values of 0. (0-damage weapons at BAR 10 are possible, but not very likely.)

Sounds good! :thumbsup: So if I've got this right, the 75mm would do 7 points of damage against BAR6, 6 against BAR7, 5 against BAR8, 4 against BAR9 and 3 against BAR10? And the 37mm would do 4 against BAR6, 3 against BAR7, 2 against BAR8, 2 against BAR9, and 1 against BAR10?

Damage from physical attacks (such as ramming), and nuclear weapons are not reduced by BAR. Artillery and Minimum ranges, when given, are not affected by BAR. (It is therefore possible to see weapons reduced in effective range to a point where their Minimum range modifiers overlap across multiple range brackets.)

Makes sense.

Some fun examples:
64-pound Black Powder Cannon (vs BAR 3): 16 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/22/43/65/173
64-pound Black Powder Cannon (vs BAR 10): 3 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/3/6/9/23
--
16-inch Naval Gun (vs. BAR 5-6): 40A   damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/25/50/75/200
16-inch Naval Gun (vs. BAR 10): 16A damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/8/16/24/63
--
125mm Smoothbore Tank Cannon (vs. BAR 5-6): 12 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 11/56/113/168/280
125mm Smoothbore Tank Cannon (vs. BAR 10): 5 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 11/18/36/53/89
--
30mm Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 5-6): 3 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/23/45/68/180
30mm Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 10): 1 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/7/14/22/57
--
30mm Gatling Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 5-6): 11 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/35/71/105/175
30mm Gatling Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 10): 5 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/11/22/33/55
--
.50 cal (U.S. [1945]) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 5-6): 2 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/15/29/44/145
.50 cal (U.S. [1945]) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 10): 1 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/5/9/14/46
--
7.62mm (European) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 5-6): 1 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/14/28/40/135
7.62mm (European) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 10): 0 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/4/9/13/43

Oooh fun!  >:D

If you're building them as robotic battle armor, yeah, but you can build the non-BA cassettes bigger.

That's cool. Thanks. :)

A quick review of your figures tells me you got it pretty much spot-on. Below 10-tons, robotics doesn't add any extra weight to a vehicle's control systems, and the Syberian version of AI is actually smaller in that they can fit their version inside a standard 3-ton  'Mech cockpit, so I think your control systems are fine. I was briefly worried you might have exceeded the vehicle's equipment slot  allowance, but you were even ok there. Nice job!

- Herb

Yay! Thanks. :) I thought I was going to go over the slot allowance too but TM said 5 slots which fit just right. :)  I don't know if Grand Slam is amphibious or not but he was way underweight so I added that chassis mod too. It's still a little underweight but there's not much I can do but add more ammo. Everything else is maxed out. :)

[Giovanni Blasini]

--
16-inch Naval Gun (vs. BAR 5-6): 40A   damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/25/50/75/200
16-inch Naval Gun (vs. BAR 10): 16A damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 5/8/16/24/63
--

Interesting how against BAR 10, it ends up being pretty comparable to a Sniper artillery piece, at least in terms of damage.  Are those ranges mapsheets, or hexes?  I ask because, against BAR 5-6, 200 hexes would work out to 6 kilometers, which seems awfully short for a 16-inch naval gun.  By way of comparison, a Sniper has a 9 km range, while the 16"/45 Mark 1/5/8 cannons on the Colorado class had a 21 km effective firing range.

125mm Smoothbore Tank Cannon (vs. BAR 5-6): 12 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 11/56/113/168/280
125mm Smoothbore Tank Cannon (vs. BAR 10): 5 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 11/18/36/53/89
--
30mm Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 5-6): 3 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/23/45/68/180
30mm Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 10): 1 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/7/14/22/57
--
30mm Gatling Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 5-6): 11 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/35/71/105/175
30mm Gatling Fighter Cannon (vs. BAR 10): 5 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/11/22/33/55

It's like an HVAC/5, only lighter!

--
.50 cal (U.S. [1945]) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 5-6): 2 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/15/29/44/145
.50 cal (U.S. [1945]) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 10): 1 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/5/9/14/46
--
7.62mm (European) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 5-6): 1 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/14/28/40/135
7.62mm (European) Machine Gun (vs. BAR 10): 0 damage; Ranges (Min/Sht/Med/Lng/Ext): 0/4/9/13/43

Those make for interesting comparisons with the standard machine guns.

[Daryk]

I'm not a fan of the range reduction for the heavier guns.  A ton of HE is a ton of HE, and it goes as far as it does.

[HABeas2]

I'm not a fan of the range reduction for the heavier guns.  A ton of HE is a ton of HE, and it goes as far as it does.

It's less about the weapon's ability to hit than it is about its ability to hit effectively; the range is not so much changing as it is its ability to penetrate well enough to break the newer armors. (Remember that, for all intents and purposes, this exercise is as much about trying to map "real world" weapons into BT, then show how BT technology is superior, as it is to justify why, if it's so superior, do the effective ranges SUCK so bad compared to real-life weapons.)

Interesting how against BAR 10, it ends up being pretty comparable to a Sniper artillery piece, at least in terms of damage.  Are those ranges mapsheets, or hexes?  I ask because, against BAR 5-6, 200 hexes would work out to 6 kilometers, which seems awfully short for a 16-inch naval gun.  By way of comparison, a Sniper has a 9 km range, while the 16"/45 Mark 1/5/8 cannons on the Colorado class had a 21 km effective firing range.

The ranges are in 30-meter hexes. And they are based on muzzle velocity and shell flight over the span of a 10-second turn, with the extreme range band representing the farthest possible reach in that time period. Naval guns, in my 1945 ruleset, also get an Artillery range, which I simply didn't cite in my examples because I didn't consider it relevant at the time. Those artillery ranges would remain unchanged by BAR anyway, though damage would still be reduced.

Those make for interesting comparisons with the standard machine guns.

No problem. Fun side fact: My first stab at this conversion method had ranges dropping by 50% per BAR level, rather than 25%. The result put the .50-cal at standard MG ranges in BT, which I saw as a GREAT selling point, until I saw how absolutely ridiculous it dropped the effective reach of the bigger guns (IIRC, I wound up having the 88mm so nerfed that it's long range was also within its minimum range band. Or something like that, anyway). So I decided to cut the effective range drop factor down, while bearing in mind that there would probably ALSO be other modifiers to attacks on BAR 10 that these rules don't yet address (namely, the often-implied "ambient ECM" for which standard BT fire control systems are able to compensate automatically, but which the "iron sights" of WWII guns cannot, though precisely how THAT explanation works here is a mystery even to me).

Sounds good! :thumbsup: So if I've got this right, the 75mm would do 7 points of damage against BAR6, 6 against BAR7, 5 against BAR8, 4 against BAR9 and 3 against BAR10? And the 37mm would do 4 against BAR6, 3 against BAR7, 2 against BAR8, 2 against BAR9, and 1 against BAR10?

Your rounding may be slightly off. A 7 vs BAR 6 would become a 6 v. BAR 7; 4 v. BAR 8-9; and 3 v. BAR 10; and a 4 vs BAR 6, would drop to 3 for BARs 7-8, and 2 vs BARs 9-10. But as I think about it, I see where the numbers can slip, as rounding for each step along the way, versus only rounding at the final step, can produce different results.

That's cool. Thanks. :)

Yay! Thanks. :) I thought I was going to go over the slot allowance too but TM said 5 slots which fit just right. :)  I don't know if Grand Slam is amphibious or not but he was way underweight so I added that chassis mod too. It's still a little underweight but there's not much I can do but add more ammo. Everything else is maxed out. :)

As I found in many of my old 1945 conversions, sometimes, you'll just *be* underweight no matter what you do (unless you're willing to REALLY go off-plan). In such cases, I just say "cargo!" and leave it at that...even if there's no slot space for it. The spare weight simply becomes an amount of external mass allowance the unit can take without losing any performance whatsoever. (In the case of BA, for instance, falling short just lets the suit carry even bigger guns in its hands before noticing any speed loss.)

- Herb

[Daryk]

My point is that works for the smaller guns.  Once you start lobbing volkswagons full of cordite around, the range and damage really don't change...

[Giovanni Blasini]

My point is that works for the smaller guns.  Once you start lobbing volkswagons full of cordite around, the range and damage really don't change...

I usually save lobbing volkswagens around for the race track (see attached).  I can neither confirm nor deny the presence of cordite.

[Daryk]

Love it Gio, LOVE IT!  :D

[Giovanni Blasini]

Funniest part is it’s got a chrome Autobot logo on the hood and a big red Autobot logo on the roof.  It is, in fact, Bumblebee.

Meanwhile, my wife has dubbed my ‘82 AMC Concord  wagon “Groundwave”.