Filling in the Syberian AutoMechs (Open Thread)

[HABeas2]

Right... I thought you were looking for the rules that exist.

Good point. Maybe that's the way to go with it, I suppose?

- Herb

[Daryk]

That's what I'd recommend...  8)

[Wrangler]

I had one last question, is it possible to have a mini Mech remoted from the parent mech.

I got the impression from the original fan story, that it was possible to do that so the auto mech can be able to go into smaller spaces promoting into the smaller machine into like say human ruins for stuff.

I understand the limitations of the rules, so I wasn't sure if that was a possibility.p

[HABeas2]

I had one last question, is it possible to have a mini Mech remoted from the parent mech.

I got the impression from the original fan story, that it was possible to do that so the auto mech can be able to go into smaller spaces promoting into the smaller machine into like say human ruins for stuff.

I understand the limitations of the rules, so I wasn't sure if that was a possibility.p

MiniMechs are always code-bonded by their construction rules, as are any Syberian drones less than 5 tons in mass. They're not truly "remote controlled" so much as reliant on their master unit for part of their processing power, which allows them to remain active even in the event of interference, but their range is limited. In game terms, this lets the player run a MiniMech as they would a human-operated battle armor unit. In fiction, it's kind of like having a continuous back-channel of telepathic-style communication that the MiniMech can call upon to handle things beyond its ken. Cinematically speaking, it's like Soundwave's cassettes, capable of operating separately and even showing some personality, but always operating in conjunction with and ultimately loyal to their master.

This is my verbose way of saying that, yeah, you can absolutely scout out human-scale ruins with AutoMech MiniMechs, and most can do so just fine as long as their master's still within 100 clicks of them.

- Herb

[glitterboy2098]

as a fan of Aoki Hagane No Arpeggio/Arpeggio of Blue Steel, the code bonding thing never gave me trouble in understanding.. its very similar to how the flagship models in the Fleet of Fog would link to the cores of their escort ships and donate runtime, allowing the escort ships to operate at a fully sentient level they normally wouldn't be able to achieve. being split across multiple bodies too, as the flagships can actually operate multiple independent personalities off the same core using similar set ups. (the manga spends a fair bit of time going into how this works because it ties into some long running storyline stuff. mostly storylines the anime version dropped due to being too underdeveloped at the time, or tied into setting elements they cut for runtime, like all of the Hakugei stuff)

[idea weenie]

Erf! Mobile Structures! Have fun with that! Did you apply any special rule to getting speeds over 1 MP?
- Herb

A lot of special rules.  Mobile structures have distributed movement systems, so a chaser can't damage a hex to slow the target down.  The other part is if you have two Mobile structures that have Speed 2, you can't have good chase scenes like London going Om-non-nom.  Mobile Structures can go slower via fractional MP, but with a hard limit of Speed 2 every ground Mobile Structure would have the same speed (predators to chase, prey to get away).  I went with a form of MP^2 so faster Mobile Structures paid a worse penalty.


Superheavy vehicles might be able to simulate some of the capabilities, though that turns into almost a regular Battletech game.  You would have Mobile Structures or fixed cities sending out swarms of Superheavy vehicles to attack others.  A Superheavy with artillery would be a good reason to live in a Mobile Structure, instead of a stationary city just waiting to get shelled by a Superheavy vehicle.  Figure the Italian city-states for politics, where a giant city is trying to amalgamate with the smaller cities around it, while the smaller cities are trying to make good neighbors so they don't get attacked/absorbed.

I had one last question, is it possible to have a mini Mech remoted from the parent mech.

I got the impression from the original fan story, that it was possible to do that so the auto mech can be able to go into smaller spaces promoting into the smaller machine into like say human ruins for stuff.

I understand the limitations of the rules, so I wasn't sure if that was a possibility.p

Check out the MiniMechs in the Syberian Rules.  They are essentially Exoskeleton/Battlearmor in size, so they can get into smaller areas.  And if they cannot get into the smaller areas, that is what their bigger brother is for.

[RifleMech]

Wookieepedia put AT-ATs at 25m in length, so they definitely fit in one BT hex. We set them up as Superheavies. They're in Welcome to the Nebula California. We even got in the cargo for speeder bikes.

I tried to get to Wookiepedia but got here instead.
https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/All_Terrain_Armored_Cargo_Transport
It puts the length at 34.90 meters

Count how many WiGE units we have in BT, and in Transformers, and you may notice I have *none* in the entire TRO. WiGEs are just so damned niche that even the Syberians found little to no use for them. If they're nerfed, that simply reinforces their rarity. Plus, in BT, when did the WiGE ever get to be as fast as fighters?

Not many and they don't which is why the question about jump jets not providing as much thrust. Maybe they're turboprops? Do WiGE Mechs follow the same movement rules as WiGEs? If so it costs 5 MP to take off and they have to move forward 5 hexes. That's 10 MP Total. WiGE Mechs would need a minimum of 7 JJ or 4 JR to give them the minimum 7/11 or 8/12 movement to stay airborne.

Nope. The Syberians went straight to Mechs. (The Thorizer had been a failure a good century and a half before they came here, but converting 'Mechs were fresh, new territory to them, and they went all-in there.)

That's cool and makes sense. :) Would have been nice but that's okay.  :thumbsup:

I don't think that Quirk exists, does it? And where are the rules for prop aircraft these days?

It was the example quirk you used in the PDF.  TW gives some movement restrictions and TM the construction rules.

Y'know, I know we discussed this someplace, but can you link me what I said back then?

My search foo is working today. :) I found these posts way back in the old Nebula California thread. Here's the main parts about it.

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/general-discussion/nebula-california-what-a-nice-surprise-bring-your-alibis/msg1052309/#msg1052309
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/general-discussion/nebula-california-what-a-nice-surprise-bring-your-alibis/msg1052906/#msg1052906

Honestly, I'd just use the VTOL AutoMech rules if you want the props to actually be functional, or a Fighter AutoMech with a low Jump MP if you want something that works at prop fighter speeds--at which point you can just "fluff" it to say it has turboprop engines in place of its jump jets.

Ah! According to my Total Warfare, the minimum Safe Thrust of 3 is for VERTICAL takeoff. Horizontal liftoff has no such restriction, beyond needing runways. Also of note: Prop-Driven aircraft have a max velocity of 1 on the High Altitude/Space scale maps, and even then can only fly at the Ground and Altitude 1 Rows (so, max altitude for them is basically 35,000 meters). You can build a Fighter AutoMech with only one Jump Jet, fluff it as a propeller aircraft in fighter mode, and have fun puttering over the combat zone.

I thought that was hilarious!  :))  And then she went and made one!
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/battlemechs/syberian-dron-automech-ransak'/msg1054611/#msg1054611

 :toofunny:

Would this make him a TriModal FighterMech with an AirMech mode?
https://tfwiki.net/wiki/File:ROTF_Ransack_BattleMode.JPG
https://tfwiki.net/wiki/File:ROTFtoy-RansackScout.jpg

??? Hmm? Maybe an Extendable Wings Quirk instead of being Trimodal? Kind of like the Peculiar Mobility Quirk but available to FighterMechs and WiGE Mechs only. The quirk allows the AutoMechs wings to extend some to act as Partial Wings in Mech Mode? Maybe add the Nimble Jumper Quirk too?

For the purposes of gameplay (and our sanity), it doesn't matter, really. I mean, bear in mind that in order to achieve their speeds, VTOLMechs tend to end up putting rotors in almost every torso location, even though their vee forms typically have just one big rotor and a tail rotor. Since the rules enable them to use such rotors to fly even in Mech form (albeit more slowly), we can just handwave that, however their rotors are actually stored, they can pop out as needed for that feature. (Otherwise, I'd be making special rules for each and every transforming helicopter toy out there, and that is anti-fun.)

Makes sense. It would be challenging to make special rules for everything. Although, I did wonder about location swapping to put Rotors in the arms but I think I'll stick with retractable blades fluffed to look like rotors.

Yeah, because just look at that image again! That's NOT buoyant! Anything allowing for standing on the water, all Jesus-like, would sink unless it was a broader platform, like a 'Mech-scaled surfboard. And Water-ski mobility requires constant high-speed movement to maintain itself, which WOULD be a good place for WiGE AutoMechs... But, again, the Syberians didn't make many WiGEMechs, and I could think of no examples to work from.

It looks like buoyant to me but it also looks like it's moving at flank speed. I'd probably have him move at flank speed or double the piloting modifiers. Otherwise they're going to have to have UMUs or they'd have to sink in Mech Mode and wade ashore. I'm pretty sure sinking would cause damage when they hit bottom.

I know he's supposed to be a starfighter but he kind of looks like a WiGE.
https://tfwiki.net/wiki/Cad_Bane
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Beriev_VVA-14_in_2010.jpg

Nah. Otherwise, the various BoatMechs would never be able to transition.

Cool.  :thumbsup:

Please don't get mad if anything in the possibly-upcoming sequel product (Plenty of Room in the Nebula California) happens to tackle a similar concept. (I wrote it way early this year/late last year, and submitted it months ago. Still don't know if/when it will be published.)

 :o A sequel? Ooooo

Except for their shielding tech, the effectiveness of their "proton torpedoes" (I think), and their super-alarming, super-massive tech and population base, yeah they suck. Also that "Fortune" stuff, which may be another localized magic effect.

Shields and Proton torpedoes are nice. Did you stat out concussion missiles?

Yeah, I meant Tactical Operations, not the long OOP Handbook.

Yup. Though remember that Jump Rocket MPs cannot exceed running MP. You'll see at least one FighterMech in the TRO section that carries Jump Rockets which would otherwise exceed its Run MP. The excess point of MP/thrust is basically "wasted" as a result. Rules is rules!

I kinda thought so. :)   Are items from Tactical Handbook available?

That's cool. It isn't a big thing but can add a bit of variety.

Might want to include that in the PDF. Jump MP can't exceed Running MP is different from  number of JJ/JR can't exceed Running MP. Right now, it looks 4/6/6 / 12/18  using 6 Jump Rockets compared to 4/6/6 / 6/9 using 3 Jump Rockets. Which is an easy mistake to make since 1 Rotor provides 1.5 MP.

Is that a real quirk, or another one I talked about adding and never got around to? (If the latter, let me know where I said it.)

It was the second example you gave in the PDF.

I *think* I may have bent that rule at least once in the TRO, but only in terms of mounting non-weapon items. In all honestly, I would relax the rules if I didn't feel I was opening a floodgate of potential problems there...

And of course you got credit; you helped me refine the rules as I went through them again (and, given the above, may have to remind me if/where/what I said previously that I may have missed.)

Being able to mount non-weapons would be a help to small vehicle drones. Weapons would've been nice but I suppose I could always use the Equivalent Weapon Table in Combat Equipment.   >:D

I'm glad I could help and if I can help I'll keep helping.  :)

Yeah, basically, we treated our AT-AT expy as a superheavy Mech, so it stood about 18m tall, while the AT-ST was an ultra-light 12-tonner.

That horizon distance calculator's neat; basically shows that the typical BattleMech sees about three times as far as a foot trooper.

How much would that AT-PT weight? It felt too big for BA but too small for a mech. I suppose it'd be 2 ton BA now. It would be nice if automatic grenade launchers were available to mechs and larger vehicles.


Cool.

That's partly true. The Syberian vehicle conversion gear masses DO allow you to avoid having to mount Tracks as separate items, but it's more of a catch-all system, in that the tracks are just counted as part of the conversion gear's weight. This makes a Syberian TrackedMech's total conversion costs about 25% lighter than those of the QuadVee (plus 1 ton for the Syberian AutoMech cockpits, as QuadVees use 4-ton cockpits.) The savings is even better for Syberian WheeledMechs vs Wheeled QuadVees. And then, yeah, there's the added motive types not seen in conversion forms in the IS. How the Syberians came up with conversion systems superior to the Clans? They had time to perfect the tech before they all managed to die out. And they still force you to pay for jump jets, Rotors, and UMUs, so any units using those end up suffering just a wee bit more.

And no, no tri-modes. That's in the back FAQ, along with what one can do instead to deal with such multimodals.

- Herb

Plus the AutoMechs can be Bipeds. Not that everything about QuadVees is bad. They don't have any restrictions on Engine, Structure, or Armor types. They can be OMNIs and they can continue to move and convert with Gyro damage. The also have a turret in both modes. So it's not all bad. Its more they different evolutionary path. It'd be interesting to see how QuadVees would be if they were available. Even if they're built using IS Tech. I imagine Hover, Float, and Submarine types would be available. Subs would have UMUs for their motive system but I'm not sure about the weight Hover and Floats would be.


Can Tracked and Wheeled AutoMechs be amphibious? I'm sure they can drive along the bottom but I was wondering about the floating on the water. Or would they just mount UMUs and convert to Mech mode to get across?

[Daryk]

One thing I missed earlier: you need 3/5 thrust to get out of the atmosphere.  2/3 will get you off the ground, but not past the interface...

[RifleMech]

One thing I missed earlier: you need 3/5 thrust to get out of the atmosphere.  2/3 will get you off the ground, but not past the interface...

Which makes sense with LAMs and FighterMechs with Aerospace Fighter being one of their modes. It makes less sense for an aircraft that doesn't need to get into space. Not that I find that Aerospace Thrust speeds make sense. :(





 

[HABeas2]

I tried to get to Wookiepedia but got here instead.
https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/All_Terrain_Armored_Cargo_Transport
It puts the length at 34.90 meters

I guess, then, we're back to not being able to say for sure what specs are what. Although, IMO, anything less than 40m (and possibly as big as 44m) probably can be considered a single-hex item, thanks to rounding and the fact that most units can't hope to fill all that space. Still, I stuck it at 120 tons, making it a superheavy, which I *think* gives it an Oversized Quirk...while ALSO giving it Narrow Profile, because the things height-to-width ratio is so ridiculous...

Not many and they don't which is why the question about jump jets not providing as much thrust. Maybe they're turboprops? Do WiGE Mechs follow the same movement rules as WiGEs? If so it costs 5 MP to take off and they have to move forward 5 hexes. That's 10 MP Total. WiGE Mechs would need a minimum of 7 JJ or 4 JR to give them the minimum 7/11 or 8/12 movement to stay airborne.

Y'know... After all this, I've come to realize...why the hell am I even dealing with WiGEs if the Syberians never made any? Consider the WiGEs cut, and their options closed. Thanks for helping me declutter this mess.

It was the example quirk you used in the PDF.  TW gives some movement restrictions and TM the construction rules.

This is what happens when you keep adding to stuff you originally wrote years ago and never bother to reread the whole thing again. *sigh*

My search foo is working today. :) I found these posts way back in the old Nebula California thread. Here's the main parts about it...
I thought that was hilarious!  :))  And then she went and made one!
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/battlemechs/syberian-dron-automech-ransak'/msg1054611/#msg1054611

Dear Cat! I miss FedComGirl! She could bog one down in endless question-and-quote threads, and she could latch onto arguments well past their expiration date, but she was just so EARNEST! I would've made her a PT/FC back in those days if I wasn't positive her thoroughness would reduce product development to a crippled snail's pace! ... Your posting style is similar to hers, sometimes, RifleMech. (Are you two related? ;) )

*looks at those specs* ... I just may have to add that Ransack biplane to the TRO as an homage. Damn. This project is already 90.6K words/220 pages long!

Would this make him a TriModal FighterMech with an AirMech mode?
https://tfwiki.net/wiki/File:ROTF_Ransack_BattleMode.JPG
https://tfwiki.net/wiki/File:ROTFtoy-RansackScout.jpg

Nah. I'm not breaking the "no more than two modes" rule. I'd just pick one, and the wings-out one is really, when you look at it, basically the Seeker template. (Which is, of course, funny in that the Bayformer version of Ransack is actually called a Seeker.)

Makes sense. It would be challenging to make special rules for everything. Although, I did wonder about location swapping to put Rotors in the arms but I think I'll stick with retractable blades fluffed to look like rotors.

Why not? Cat knows I picked a number of blade-wielding minis to represent VTOLMechs in BattleMech mode. And we also have fun bits like "Blinder's" rotor-style combine on the arm as a physical combat weapon.

It looks like buoyant to me but it also looks like it's moving at flank speed. I'd probably have him move at flank speed or double the piloting modifiers. Otherwise they're going to have to have UMUs or they'd have to sink in Mech Mode and wade ashore. I'm pretty sure sinking would cause damage when they hit bottom.

Right. It's moving to stay like that, like a water-skier. But that's not buoyancy; that's momentum and surface tension. The thing would sink the moment it stopped "skiing" in robot mode. I made it one of the Mariner class.

I know he's supposed to be a starfighter but he kind of looks like a WiGE.

Yes. It does. A lot like Grievous's fighter, too, I think. But you've already convinced me the WiGE is impractical and pointless here, so we're saved!

:o A sequel? Ooooo

Yup. A bunch of new worlds.

Shields and Proton torpedoes are nice. Did you stat out concussion missiles?

No. That was Paul's bit, and we were working on a tight deadline.

I kinda thought so. :)   Are items from Tactical Handbook available?

Nothing that didn't end up in TacOps and TW, and then only using the TW/TO rules. TH is obsolete.

Might want to include that in the PDF. Jump MP can't exceed Running MP is different from  number of JJ/JR can't exceed Running MP. Right now, it looks 4/6/6 / 12/18  using 6 Jump Rockets compared to 4/6/6 / 6/9 using 3 Jump Rockets. Which is an easy mistake to make since 1 Rotor provides 1.5 MP.

I thought I was rather explicit in what the various systems did.

It was the second example you gave in the PDF.

Blah.

Being able to mount non-weapons would be a help to small vehicle drones. Weapons would've been nice but I suppose I could always use the Equivalent Weapon Table in Combat Equipment.   >:D

Y'know I'm not gonna enforce that kind of rule, but you already taught me that Weapon Equivalency Tables were a BAD idea. I was working on a TRO1945 ruleset that would have done away with that stuff.

How much would that AT-PT weight? It felt too big for BA but too small for a mech. I suppose it'd be 2 ton BA now. It would be nice if automatic grenade launchers were available to mechs and larger vehicles.

No idea. Could be a 10-ton Mech.

Can Tracked and Wheeled AutoMechs be amphibious? I'm sure they can drive along the bottom but I was wondering about the floating on the water. Or would they just mount UMUs and convert to Mech mode to get across?

I'm gonna look into the options a bit, but the notion of using the Support Vehicle chassis mods as a basis intrigues me.

- Herb

[RifleMech]

I guess, then, we're back to not being able to say for sure what specs are what. Although, IMO, anything less than 40m (and possibly as big as 44m) probably can be considered a single-hex item, thanks to rounding and the fact that most units can't hope to fill all that space. Still, I stuck it at 120 tons, making it a superheavy, which I *think* gives it an Oversized Quirk...while ALSO giving it Narrow Profile, because the things height-to-width ratio is so ridiculous...

I'd go with the older stats. I would think 120 tons would be oversized. The narrow profile would fit the AT-AT well.

Y'know... After all this, I've come to realize...why the hell am I even dealing with WiGEs if the Syberians never made any? Consider the WiGEs cut, and their options closed. Thanks for helping me declutter this mess.

You're welcome,  I guess.   :-\   So I guess making the Snowspeeder as a WiGE is out.
https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/images2/d/dc/SWTF-toy_LukeSnowspeeder.JPG

This is what happens when you keep adding to stuff you originally wrote years ago and never bother to reread the whole thing again. *sigh*

I guess it is a good idea to check your work once in a while.

Dear Cat! I miss FedComGirl! She could bog one down in endless question-and-quote threads, and she could latch onto arguments well past their expiration date, but she was just so EARNEST! I would've made her a PT/FC back in those days if I wasn't positive her thoroughness would reduce product development to a crippled snail's pace! ... Your posting style is similar to hers, sometimes, RifleMech. (Are you two related? ;) )

*looks at those specs* ... I just may have to add that Ransack biplane to the TRO as an homage. Damn. This project is already 90.6K words/220 pages long!

Yes, and she can be very earnest and have a difficult time dropping things.

That would be cool. I think she'd get a thrill out of that.

Nah. I'm not breaking the "no more than two modes" rule. I'd just pick one, and the wings-out one is really, when you look at it, basically the Seeker template. (Which is, of course, funny in that the Bayformer version of Ransack is actually called a Seeker.)

Huh. I suppose it is. (I thought that was funny too.)

Why not? Cat knows I picked a number of blade-wielding minis to represent VTOLMechs in BattleMech mode. And we also have fun bits like "Blinder's" rotor-style combine on the arm as a physical combat weapon.

Cool!

Right. It's moving to stay like that, like a water-skier. But that's not buoyancy; that's momentum and surface tension. The thing would sink the moment it stopped "skiing" in robot mode. I made it one of the Mariner class.

That's why I wondered about it. So it can go to and from shore without sinking.

Yes. It does. A lot like Grievous's fighter, too, I think. But you've already convinced me the WiGE is impractical and pointless here, so we're saved!

It does kind of but it isn't. Grievous's fighter would be a good candidate for a WiGE Mech too.
https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/images2/2/25/Crossovers-toy_GrievousStarfighter.JPG

I suppose but I still like the idea of a WiGE Mech. Maybe more as a variant of the HoverMech instead of a Fighter Mech?   

Yup. A bunch of new worlds.

No. That was Paul's bit, and we were working on a tight deadline.

Cool!

Oh. I wonder what they would have been stated.

Nothing that didn't end up in TacOps and TW, and then only using the TW/TO rules. TH is obsolete.

I know but some are referenced in TO and still make for good prototypes.  Plus I thought using the TH Mechanical Jump Boosters on a non-converting beast mech might be kind of cool. Oh well.

I thought I was rather explicit in what the various systems did.

Blah.

You were. In the thread you limited the Jump MP to the Running MP with any exceeding being wasted. The PDF says,

Jump Rockets follow all the same construction and gameplay rules as an Improved Jump Jet of equal weight, but provides 2 Jump MP per Rocket, rather than 1.

That gives room for faster speeds if the number of Jump Rockets can equal the Running MP.

Y'know I'm not gonna enforce that kind of rule, but you already taught me that Weapon Equivalency Tables were a BAD idea. I was working on a TRO1945 ruleset that would have done away with that stuff.

I don't know if they were bad but I do like your rules for converting RL to BT. With the CE Table though there's already plenty of references saying that Infantry and Vehicle weapons are the same. And then the rules go and do something else.  ::)

No idea. Could be a 10-ton Mech.

I'm gonna look into the options a bit, but the notion of using the Support Vehicle chassis mods as a basis intrigues me.

- Herb

Maybe. 

Cool! :)

[HABeas2]

I'd go with the older stats. I would think 120 tons would be oversized. The narrow profile would fit the AT-AT well.

Too late; they were published years ago.

You're welcome,  I guess.   :-\   So I guess making the Snowspeeder as a WiGE is out.

Star Empire is 80-something light years thataway.

Yes, and she can be very earnest and have a difficult time dropping things.
That would be cool. I think she'd get a thrill out of that.

Maybe. I think the mods perma-banned her from the forums, though. She may never know.

I suppose but I still like the idea of a WiGE Mech. Maybe more as a variant of the HoverMech instead of a Fighter Mech?

Hovers or Fighters only would I say. Some WiGEs in real life double as actual aircraft already, since they use most of the same engineering principles.

Oh. I wonder what they would have been stated.

*shrug*

You were. In the thread you limited the Jump MP to the Running MP with any exceeding being wasted. The PDF says,
That gives room for faster speeds if the number of Jump Rockets can equal the Running MP.

I added some polished up wording about them just to be sure.

I don't know if they were bad but I do like your rules for converting RL to BT. With the CE Table though there's already plenty of references saying that Infantry and Vehicle weapons are the same. And then the rules go and do something else.  ::)

No, they were. You beat me over the head with them far too many times and so I decided to ditch equivalency entirely. Nothing but pain that way.

- Herb

[RifleMech]

Too late; they were published years ago.

Star Empire is 80-something light years thataway.

I don't know. Maybe it just needs the right inspiration to revisit it?

 :D ;D

Maybe. I think the mods perma-banned her from the forums, though. She may never know.

That's what I heard. Caused her to lose a lot of interest in BT. If you decide to include it I'll send her a message and let her know.

Hovers or Fighters only would I say. Some WiGEs in real life double as actual aircraft already, since they use most of the same engineering principles.

*shrug*

I have read that. I think trying to make them work might be a pain though. Just look at all the problems AirMechs have and these would be going faster. I think I'd go with Hovers. I would lean towards having them use IS Partial Wings as a combination wings and thrusters. They'd give WiGE movement but not AirMech Movement. Each crit hit drops the MP. Although, I want to lean towards allowing limited flight if jump jets are installed but not as high as AirMechs. Maybe +1 elevation per jump jet to a max of 8 elevations with the same +1 MP cost per hex. Then WiGE Mech could slowly fly over trees and buildings. I think that'd be a nice in between Hover and Fighter without being as good as an AirMech.

I added some polished up wording about them just to be sure.

 :thumbsup:

No, they were. You beat me over the head with them far too many times and so I decided to ditch equivalency entirely. Nothing but pain that way.

- Herb

I wouldn't say that. I do like them better than Rifle Cannons and it's fun using the lighter Tank Cannons on smaller vehicles. They don't do a lot of damage but give some fun choices besides MGs, Flamers, and Missiles. The formula though gives even more variety between weapons and eras.  :thumbsup:  :beer:



Did the Syberians create Tripods?  I haven't seen any so far. I was wondering about the restrictions against tripods and wondered wouldn't a trimaran be a good vehicle mode for a Float Tripod, a Vedette Light Tank for a tracked tripod, and a three wheeler for a wheeled Tripod?

[HABeas2]

I don't know. Maybe it just needs the right inspiration to revisit it?

Go ahead. I'm not doing it this time! I need to be doing work that actually earns money here!

That's what I heard. Caused her to lose a lot of interest in BT. If you decide to include it I'll send her a message and let her know.

Huh. Well, if you can contact her, I tell you what: Ask her if it's okay for me to add that one in. I shouldn't be nicking someone else's fan material without them having a say (I used everyone else's in this thread because that basically felt like the right way to go, given the stated purpose of this discussion, and I feel like the permission was implicit--not to mention that everyone in here has the right to tell me to take them out, if desired.)

I have read that. I think trying to make them work might be a pain though. Just look at all the problems AirMechs have and these would be going faster. I think I'd go with Hovers. I would lean towards having them use IS Partial Wings as a combination wings and thrusters. They'd give WiGE movement but not AirMech Movement. Each crit hit drops the MP. Although, I want to lean towards allowing limited flight if jump jets are installed but not as high as AirMechs. Maybe +1 elevation per jump jet to a max of 8 elevations with the same +1 MP cost per hex. Then WiGE Mech could slowly fly over trees and buildings. I think that'd be a nice in between Hover and Fighter without being as good as an AirMech.

That we'd even now still be debating the concept tells me that deleting them was the right call.

Did the Syberians create Tripods?  I haven't seen any so far. I was wondering about the restrictions against tripods and wondered wouldn't a trimaran be a good vehicle mode for a Float Tripod, a Vedette Light Tank for a tracked tripod, and a three wheeler for a wheeled Tripod?

The Syberians have access to tripod designs, and can make them into convertibles, but in the spirit of what we are emulating here, we simply haven't seen any (ARE there any tripod Cybertronians out there? I couldn't find any in a quick search). So, this is one case where you can make up an all-new model.

- Herb

[HABeas2]

Rule Section! Second-Final Draft!

Come and see the modifications inherent in the system!

- Herb

[RifleMech]

Go ahead. I'm not doing it this time! I need to be doing work that actually earns money here!

I hear ya. We could use money coming in here too. It might be fun to try while waiting for things to get sorted but we'll see.

Huh. Well, if you can contact her, I tell you what: Ask her if it's okay for me to add that one in. I shouldn't be nicking someone else's fan material without them having a say (I used everyone else's in this thread because that basically felt like the right way to go, given the stated purpose of this discussion, and I feel like the permission was implicit--not to mention that everyone in here has the right to tell me to take them out, if desired.)

I can do that. I'll let you know what she says.

That we'd even now still be debating the concept tells me that deleting them was the right call.

I suppose but they're still an interesting concept.

The Syberians have access to tripod designs, and can make them into convertibles, but in the spirit of what we are emulating here, we simply haven't seen any (ARE there any tripod Cybertronians out there? I couldn't find any in a quick search). So, this is one case where you can make up an all-new model.

- Herb

That's cool. Nothing official that I know of. I did find this one based on the Focke-Wulf Triebflügel. It'd be a FighterMech  ;D  and probably the only way it'd really work. It'd also make Emplacement Mechs seem perfectly normal.
https://web.archive.org/web/20050219081640/http://www22.pos.to/~butto/tttf-07.html   I also found a Starscream as a Fokker Triplane to go along with Ransack if you like. 
https://www.reddit.com/r/transformers/comments/nxr21a/the_many_formats_of_starscream/
Would you want any other Prop FighterMechs?

Would Tripods still have 4 ton cockpits?

[HABeas2]

I can do that. I'll let you know what she says.

Cool.

I suppose but they're still an interesting concept.

To each their own, I guess. I don't feel they were worth the effort in game terms. They basically are aircraft that function like hovercraft, and we had both of those things already.

That's cool. Nothing official that I know of. I did find this one based on the Focke-Wulf Triebflügel. It'd be a FighterMech  ;D  and probably the only way it'd really work. It'd also make Emplacement Mechs seem perfectly normal.

EmplacementMechs will NEVER be normal as far as these IE folks are concerned... (Interesting take on the Aerialbots, there...)

I also found a Starscream as a Fokker Triplane to go along with Ransack if you like. 
Would you want any other Prop FighterMechs?

Ah, so many of those unofficials are so awesome; shame they cost an arm and a leg. I'll pass on more prop-fighter Mechs for now. I just thought it'd be neat to include FCG's Ransack expy since she went through the trouble there.

Would Tripods still have 4 ton cockpits?

Nope. All 'mech-type AutoMechs need the 3-ton AutoMech cockpit to be driven by the AutoMech AI. They don't need the extra seat.

- Herb

[Wrangler]

Would there been civilian vehicles that had automech technology. They'd need a cockpit of some kind wouldn't they?

Not say its worth our while having transforming airliner, but be cool to seen conventional air support vehicle transform and deploy it's MiniMech battalion/platoon.

[HABeas2]

Would there been civilian vehicles that had automech technology. They'd need a cockpit of some kind wouldn't they?

Not say its worth our while having transforming airliner, but be cool to seen conventional air support vehicle transform and deploy it's MiniMech battalion/platoon.

They have civilian units, sure, but if they put an AutoMech brain in it, they left no room for a human copilot. Otherwise, why wouldn't ALL AutoMechs have a seat for human pilots? The Syberians REALLY trusted their self-driving vehicles! Passengers would go into a cargo space, if any.

Fun image I drew to fill some dead space in the rules attached!

- Herb

[Wrangler]

Fun image I drew to fill some dead space in the rules attached!
- Herb

That's auto picture, it looks like the insignias are transforming from left to right.  :D

[HABeas2]

That's auto picture, it looks like the insignias are transforming from left to right.  :D

AutoBoP logo to DemoCon. I originally considered a simpler G1-style "spin around and find the other logo on the back" dealie, but I like the more modern idea of showing one transform into the other.

- Herb

[RifleMech]

Cool.

To each their own, I guess. I don't feel they were worth the effort in game terms. They basically are aircraft that function like hovercraft, and we had both of those things already.

I'll play around with them some more. Maybe I'll have a world where the Star Empire crossed with Syberians? We could throw in other crossovers for kicks.  ;D

EmplacementMechs will NEVER be normal as far as these IE folks are concerned... (Interesting take on the Aerialbots, there...)

 ;D :))   I thought so. I'll try giving them a whirl and post them in the other thread when I'm done.

Ah, so many of those unofficials are so awesome; shame they cost an arm and a leg. I'll pass on more prop-fighter Mechs for now. I just thought it'd be neat to include FCG's Ransack expy since she went through the trouble there.

Yes they are and yes it is. I like some of them more than the official ones but I can't afford those either right now.  :'(   Yeah, it would be neat if you included it.

Nope. All 'mech-type AutoMechs need the 3-ton AutoMech cockpit to be driven by the AutoMech AI. They don't need the extra seat.

- Herb

Cool! Here's the Vedette Tripod TankMech. I went with the 3 ton cockpit but I also added 10% to the conversion system for the third leg and rounded up. It ended up coming out even. I also added a conversion slot and track slot for the center leg.  I also tried to put it in your format.

The configurations revolve around cannons. The first three use an AC/5, LB/5X, or UAC/5 with 2 tons of ammo. That lets the first two use multiple ammo types and the third to rapid fire without worrying about running out of ammo. The remaining three are more mission specific and they use Rifle Cannons.  :D  The  first uses the HRC as a bunker buster. The second uses the LRCs to hunt for MiniMechs and MiniDrones. The third is a cross between the first two and uses a LRC and a MRC to support them. FedComGirl suggested using class 2 autocannons and EW gear to be scouts and snipers. So I added them in too.  She was also surprised you remembered her and flattered you want to use Ransack. She says you can use him and that it was nice of you to ask.

I think the armor is a bit light. A part of me wants to drop the engine rating for a 4/6 speed and put that weight into the armor. That'd give it 160 points of armor so it could survive more than one big hit to any location. Other than that I think it came out pretty good. What do you think?


Vedette Tripod TankMech            50 Tons
Internal Structure                      5.5
Conversion System    Tracked     8.5
Engine                   250 Fusion   12.5
     Walking MP             5
     Running MP             8
     Jumping MP             0
     Cruising MP             5
     Flank MP                 8
Heat Sinks                   10
Gyro                                        3
Cockpit                     Drone       3
Armor                        96          6
                 Internal     Armor
                Structure    Value
Head             3              6
Center Torso  16            15/3
R/L Torso       12            10/3
R/L Arm         8             8
R/C/L Leg      12            10

Fixed                             Location      Critical   Mass
Conversion System   RA/LA/RL/CL/LL   5          0
Tracks                      RA/LA/RL/CL/LL   5          0

Weapons and Amm
Primary Configuration
AC/5                                RT              4          8
Ammo (AC)  40                 LT              2          2
CASE                                LT              1         .5
ER Medium Laser               RA             1          1

Flak Configuration   
LB-5X                               RT             5           8
Ammo (40)                       LT              2           2
CASE                                LT              1           .5
ER Medium Laser               RA             1            1

Assault Configuration
UAC/5                              RT             5            9
Ammo (UAC) 40                LT              2           2
CASE                                LT              1          .5

Bunker Buster Configuration 
Heavy Rifle Cannon           RT              3            8
Ammo (HDC) 12               LT               2            2
CASE                                LT              1           .5
ER Medium Laser               RA             1            1

Anti-MiniMech/Drone Configuration
2x Light Rifle Cannon         RT             2            6
VGL                                  RT             1            .5
Ammo (LRC) 36                 LT             2            2
CASE                                LT             1             .5
VGL                                  LT             1             .5
Small Pulse Laser              RA             1             1
Small Pulse Laser              LA              1             1

Support Configuration
Light Rifle Cannon             RT             1            3
Medium Rifle Cannon         RT             1            5
Ammo (LRC) 18                LT              1            1
Ammo (MRC) 9                 LT              1            1
CASE                                LT             1            .5
ER Small Laser                 RA              1           .5
ER Small Laser                 LA              1            .5

Sniper/Scout A  Configuration
AC/2                               RT              1             6
Beagle Active Probe          CT             2            1.5
Ammo (AC) 90                 LT              2             2
CASE                               LT              1            .5
ER Medium Laser              RA              1             1
ER Small Laser                 LA              1             .5

Sniper/Scout B Configuration
LB/2X                              RT              4             6
Guardian ECM Suite          CT              2             1.5
Ammo 90                         LT              2             2
CASE                               LT              1             .5
ER Medium Laser              RA              1             1
ER Small Laser                 LA              1             .5

Sniper/Scout C Configuration
UAC/2                              RT              3             7
Remote Sensor Dispenser  CT              1             .5
Com. Equipment               CT              1             1
Ammo (AC) 90                  LT              2             2
CASE                               LT              1             .5
ER Small Laser                 LA              1             .5

[RifleMech]

Would there been civilian vehicles that had automech technology. They'd need a cockpit of some kind wouldn't they?

Not say its worth our while having transforming airliner, but be cool to seen conventional air support vehicle transform and deploy it's MiniMech battalion/platoon.

Wouldn't the cockpit be replaced by the Drone's CPUs?   I also imagine there'd be cargo planes and other transports. Although an AirlinerMech would be cool. I'd imagine many of the passenger versions would have been reconfigured to tankers or cargo planes. 

I imagine there'd be other kinds or civilian vehicles/mechs with most pressed into military service. Like a Agro Mech swapping the harvester for a mine sweeper and cargo bay for mine dispensers.

They have civilian units, sure, but if they put an AutoMech brain in it, they left no room for a human copilot. Otherwise, why wouldn't ALL AutoMechs have a seat for human pilots? The Syberians REALLY trusted their self-driving vehicles! Passengers would go into a cargo space, if any.

Fun image I drew to fill some dead space in the rules attached!

- Herb

Humans don't have to ride in the head do they? The Star Empire puts people in any location. The Sandman LAM also had those rescue pods carrying 2 passengers per .5 tons. And wasn't there a rule somewhere were extra crew weigh .5 tons each? That could be three different passenger classes, infantry, second class, and first class.

[Wrangler]

I always though passengers had to be in Infantry Bay of some kind.

[RifleMech]

I always though passengers had to be in Infantry Bay of some kind.

Infantry can ride in cargo compartments.

[HABeas2]

I'll play around with them some more. Maybe I'll have a world where the Star Empire crossed with Syberians? We could throw in other crossovers for kicks.  ;D

Suit yourself. The California Nebula is a crossover playground. We just presented each system with a lacking in FTL as a means of keeping franchises separate and "unspoiled." Things get very weird when they mix and match (as we saw in WttNC's opening fic, when Grimdark killed one of the Fellowship.)

Yeah, it would be neat if you included it.

As soon as she gives the okay, sure.

Cool! Here's the Vedette Tripod TankMech. I went with the 3 ton cockpit but I also added 10% to the conversion system for the third leg and rounded up. It ended up coming out even. I also added a conversion slot and track slot for the center leg.  I also tried to put it in your format.

I'd have let you get away with the conversion system staying the same mass as normal. Tripods already take the hit on tonnage for their configurations in the increased internal structure and armor mass. The added slots I would keep, yes. That is, if I were to introduce tripod AutoMechs beyond the Emplacement and non-converting ones. I just didn't want to add more complexity to something that we don't really see in our Transformers. That's why the convertible schemes tended to get chassis locked to Biped or Biped/Quad limits. (My War of the Tripods adventure shows some neat tripod 'Mechs that could easily be AutoMech-driven, and fluffed out as a heretofore-undiscovered "alien" faction.)

Wouldn't the cockpit be replaced by the Drone's CPUs?   I also imagine there'd be cargo planes and other transports. Although an AirlinerMech would be cool. I'd imagine many of the passenger versions would have been reconfigured to tankers or cargo planes. 

I imagine there'd be other kinds or civilian vehicles/mechs with most pressed into military service. Like a Agro Mech swapping the harvester for a mine sweeper and cargo bay for mine dispensers.

Humans don't have to ride in the head do they? The Star Empire puts people in any location. The Sandman LAM also had those rescue pods carrying 2 passengers per .5 tons. And wasn't there a rule somewhere were extra crew weigh .5 tons each? That could be three different passenger classes, infantry, second class, and first class.

I always though passengers had to be in Infantry Bay of some kind.

A few things worth note: Cargo space on BattleMechs is not that new a concept, but is generally illegal in standard unit construction, especially in the case of bays for infantry. (And yeah, Wrangler, you'd ideally want an infantry bay for human passengers, because that represents a space in which there's seating, maybe some safety equipment, and gear stowage compartments.) The Syberians would have generally kept any human-transporting capacity to their vehicle AutoMechs, eschewing the conversion capabilities for more comfortable passenger/cargo space. Converting vehicle AutoMechs could also have some space set aside like that, but it would only be considered safe as long as the unit remained in vehicle mode. (After that, Syberian health/life insurance companies probably just wouldn't cover.)

As I indicated earlier in this thread (somewhere), the only reason you aren't seeing civilian/human-passenger units among the AutoMechs of this Syberia TRO is that they've naturally fallen into disuse by the time IE's teams arrived. Covering units such as those would almost certainly require a Syberian version of the Support Vehicle TRO, which would skew toward more vehicle/aerospace AutoMech-driven units than 'Mechs.

(I know nothing of this Sandman LAM. Was that an official design someplace?)

Infantry can ride in cargo compartments.

They can; it's just not as safe or comfortable. That wouldn't stop a Syberian AutoMech from putting their smaller drones in the same space, though. That's how we get our deployer units, after all.

- Herb

[glitterboy2098]

The Sandman LAM was a fan design from battletechnology. It had a pair of 1ton infantry bays fluffed as search and rescue pods.

[HABeas2]

The Sandman LAM was a fan design from battletechnology. It had a pair of 1ton infantry bays fluffed as search and rescue pods.

Funny. Who was the LD back then? Because I was told waaaaaaay back when I started, by Bryan Nystul, that infantry bays on a BattleMech were verbotten. (Because I tried to make a quadruped APC called the Clydesdale for Clan Hell's Horses.)

- Herb

[glitterboy2098]

We're talking really early "we had to rename from battledroids its now battletech" stuff here. I'm not sure they'd clarified the no way nrantry bays on a mech thing at the time. Plus again, fan design in a fan publication. The battletechnology fanzine was full of stuff the rules didn't cover yet, and which saw no official stance, despite the magazine technically being recognized by FASA.

(In fact i beleive that the issie in question came out before the clans were introduced)

[HABeas2]

We're talking really early "we had to rename from battledroids its now battletech" stuff here. I'm not sure they'd clarified the no way nrantry bays on a mech thing at the time. Plus again, fan design in a fan publication. The battletechnology fanzine was full of stuff the rules didn't cover yet, and which saw no official stance, despite the magazine technically being recognized by FASA.

(In fact i beleive that the issie in question came out before the clans were introduced)

Okie. Then we're not talking canon. Sweet!

- Herb