The /btg/ is dead, long live the /btg/!
Old thread: >>43794041
=====================
>/btg/ does a TRO.
http://builtforwar.blog(not spam) spot.com/
>The Happening has Happened and it was glorious:
http://bg.battletech.com/news/news-and-announcements/drop-pod-sequence-initiatedthree-two-one/
>How do I do this Against the Bot thing?
http://pastebin.com/pE2f7TR5 (embed)
>Can I get an overview of the major factions?
http://bg.battletech.com/universe/great-houses/
http://bg.battletech.com/universe/the-clans/
http://bg.battletech.com/universe/other-powers/
>How do I find out what mechs a faction has?
http://masterunitlist.info/
>Map of /btg/ players (WIP):
https://www.zeemaps.com/map?group=1116217&add=1
>Battletech Introductory Info and PDFs
http://bg.battletech.com/?page_id=400
>Rookie guides
http://pastebin.com/HZvGKuGx (embed)
>Sarna.net - Battletech Wiki
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Main_Page
>Megamek - computer version of Battletech. Play with AI or other players
http://megamek.info/
>SSW Mech Designer
http://www.solarisskunkwerks.com/
>Battletech IRC
#battletech on irc.rizon.net
>PDF Folders
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/9q792hobnbpw3/Battletech
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/sdckg6j645z4j/Battletech
hahah
Steiner STRONK
haha
Steiner WEAK
>>43815601
>tfw this makes up most of the Lyran Commonwealth Navy pre Succession Wars.
>>43815627
>>43815627
mako's a pretty decent corvette m8
>>43815700
I need more tonnage. And guns. Mostly tonnage though. They're Lyrans.
OK, following up to:
>>43814265
>>43814125
This will be several posts long.
>1/?
>Corvette (CVT)
Corvettes are lightweight, generally lightly-armed vessels that are generally used for short-range commerce raiding or a close blockade of merchant shipping. As such, they need to be relatively fast in normal space (so as to run down merchant DropShips), and have sufficient firepower to overwhelm a single DropShip. Armor is definitely secondary because they're not intended to face meaningful capital-scale weapons, but fuel and supplies are not, as they may need to remain on-station for significant amounts of time. DropShip collars are not necessary; at most they'd carry 1.
>Destroyer (DD)
Fleet escorts. Destroyers should have sufficient speed to remain evasive much of the time and still keep up with larger craft. Their roles are to use WarShip ECM to screen larger vessels, use layered anti-fighter armaments to *destroy* attacking aerospace fighters (hence, "destroyer"), and to project anti-capital ship fire. As such, their weapons should generally consist of bracket-capable naval lasers (for AAA use) and capital missiles for antiship use, although some might use a few very large-calibre guns for antiship purposes instead. Armor and SI are high priority; they can't screen larger ships if they're dead. Cargo space, Drop Collars, and fuel are low priority - fleet tenders should be providing most of these.
>>43816062
>2/?
>Frigate (FF)
Whereas a DD is made to escort capital ships, frigates are made in the same displacement range and made to operate alone as commerce raiders and reconnaissance ships. Armor and SI are reduced in favor of cargo and fuel, and weapons are intended to be enough to overwhelm both merchants and a WarShip escort of roughly CVT class. Anti-fighter duties are more defensive than a DD; whereas a DD seeks out fights with ASF squadrons and smashes them at range, an FF uses fighter-scale guns to defend itself against 1-2 squadrons of ASFs carried by the targets (if it kills the target, the ASFs will generally surrender since otherwise they're guaranteed to die once they run out of gas). 0-2 Drop Collars are carried; some factions like having parasite craft, others don't want to devote parts and gas storage to supporting them, in favor of increased direct-combat abilities. L-F batteries are ESSENTIAL.
>Light Cruiser (CL), Heavy Cruiser (CA)
Light Cruisers and Heavy Cruisers all generally share the same duties and mission profile, and are mostly separated by mass and survivability. The line between them is blurry and is relative to the operating faction; one faction's "light" cruiser may be a heavy cruiser in another faction. All cruisers are made to travel long distances (ie, "cruise), and generally act as a "jack-of-all-trades." A cruiser should be able to contribute meaningfully to escorting a BB or larger ship, fast enough to hunt down merchants, and project a meaningful amount of anti-ship firepower. Cruiser-classified ships have by far the widest range of potential builds, depending on what the constructing power wants out of them.
>>43816089
>3/?
>Battlecruiser (BC)
The explicit jobs of a Battlecruiser are to hunt down and kill enemy cruisers, and to use their superior normal space speed to position themselves against enemy capital ships (BBs and DNs) in such a way as to significantly disadvantage the enemy. Battlecruisers tend to have relatively large fuel fractions (they may not be faster than a CA, but they can burn their fuel for longer), large levels of armor for their SI, fewer but heavier-hitting gun mounts, low magazine space, and relatively low SI for their mass. BCs will almost always have at least 2 DropShip collars, usually capping out at 5. BCs have little in the way of conventional fighter defenses, instead depending on parasite fighter carriers to screen them, so they can use internal tonnage for more engines/guns.
>Battleship (BB)
The Battleship is made specifically to engage and kill other WarShips of almost any size. They give up some level of speed (this is the first class that should almost universally be "3/5"), in order to mount heavy armor and a variety of capital weapon systems. The phrase "a gun for every occasion" should apply here. A BB and a DN should rate roughly the same displacement, but a BB is made to fight largely on its own or as the flagship of a lighter squadron, and thus its weapons and armor are more balanced between all arcs. BBs universally mount many Drop Collars (4-6), so further extend their capacity to handle any situation on their own. Note that BBs and BCs should have *roughly* equivalent mass.
>>43816114
>4/?
>Dreadnought (DN)
The Dreadnought is at most only slightly heavier than a BB, but whereas a BB is a slower ship with a very wide variety of armament and capabilities, a DN is explicitly and totally a space-superiority platform, dedicated solely to fighting in line against other capital ships. As such, its armor and weapons are canted to the *sides* so that it may fight on the broadside. Weapons are very streamlined, with lots of idential naval weapons of the heaviest caliber. Anti-fighter defenses are incidental (a DN armed with large batteries of NLs, for example), and may even be entirely omitted. DNs usually mount the same number of Drop Collars as a BB, but will usually use them for assault ships to screen the battle line, or for the spare parts and tertiary fuel colliers that its internal stores don't cover. McKennas and Du Shi Wangs would both qualify as DNs.
>Light Carrier (CVL)
A light carrier is designed as an inexpensive craft to carry ASFs from place to place, often operating as an escort unit for merchants or a supplementary unit for planetary invasions (ASFs can escort a craft down into the atmosphere, while a pure "gun" escort has to stop at the atmosphere/space interface). It will rely much more on internal stowage for cargo and ASF supplies instead of DropShips to keep the cost of the unit down. CVLs are largely differentiated from CVs by mass, number of ASFs carried, and an ability to resupply the fighters - carrying more than 1 Wing of fighters almost universally classifies a craft as a CV, instead of a CVL. Note that some WarShips of other classifications can carry more than one wing of fighters - the difference is that a CV or CVL is PURPOSE-BUILT to carry the ASFs, and doesn't mount significant capital weaponry.
>>43816147
>5/5
>Carrier (CV)
Just like a CVL, but it should generally carry at least 3 Wings of fighters (generally broken down into 1 wing each of Interceptors, Dogfighters, and Attack Craft). These are more significant assets than CVLs and so will include a few Drop Collars. CVs will prioritize speed, armor, and cargo space (ASFs) over capital ships; the faster and further a CV can travel, the more fuel and loiter time its fighters will have on-target. Many CVs mount at least a token quad-mount NL battery in some arcs to provide some last-ditch anti-fighter defense
>CVA = Assault Carrier
About the same size as a CV, but it gives up speed for more armor/SI and a credible antiship armament that can also be used for ground bombardment. The purpose of a CVA is to shove itself into a defensive position, launch a ton of fighters, and support them (and/or ground landings) with capital weapon fire. The number of capital weapon batteries may be low, but they should be hard-hitting. If any ship is the equivalent to the Galactica, it's this one.
>FU = Fuck You
1 class per faction, high-mass, min-maxed ships that make your opponent look at your TO&E and say "fuck you, man." These craft are fleets in being themselves, and should generally take a line squadron (4-6 BBs or DNs) to kill. Any of the combat Leviathan classes (not the Lev I, obviously) fall into this category in standard AeroTech. Everybody gets a few of these Death Star units, and they generally sit around because nobody wants to lose one, but they're there for the munchkins and to have really shitkicking apocalyptic scenarios with.
From the way you describe them, most battletech designs regardless of alleged class are actually either mediocre destroyers or lousy cruisers, with a bare handful of battleships
I like these warship class specifications.
>>43816114
How would you classify a warship mounting a dreadnaught-esque gun array on a cruiser-sized hull? Say something built as a stop-gap to fight enemy battleships in the absense of a proper BB?
My question is where Drone vessels fall in this mix. Nominally they'd be hyper overarmed Destroyers, but I've got to know.
>>43816479
Assuming you're talking about a DN-level of *throw weight*, I'd probably classify it as a BC or a particularly up-gunned Heavy Cruiser.
If what you mean is a DN *STYLE* of gun layout (ie, 90% MNPPCs with a 3-tube missile battery on the fore and aft quarters for general purposes instead of the mixed-caliber armament more probably carried by cruisers), then it'd just be a cruiser that's built to that standard.
Classifications aren't straightjackets, and there's certainly room for other ones I haven't included here. For example, a real-world DDG is a "Guided Missile Destroyer". So what if I took a DD hull, stripped out all the guns, and strapped a TON of Kraken-Ts to it? Would it be a DD or a DDG? There's room for more stuff besides what I've listed.
>>43816589
Yeah, I meant DD throw weight, not an all-big-gun cruiser.
So it'd be a battlecruiser? Thanks (I'm designing such a thing based on a Winchester hull as to fill out the taurian navy/later the RWR secret fleet)
>>43816589
Also, as a completely random question, how would you classify a warship that mounts a spinal Mass Driver like the Soyal? I mean, the rest of the ship is obviously designed in a certain way, but I feel like that sort of fuck-off gun would change things in some way
>>43814147
>what's the difference between a battleship and a dreadnought?
Bettleships are designed to work as the center of a force, and are expected to be able to take on a ship of almost any weight class (with the exception of carriers and torpedo boats, as several nations found to their chagrin in WWII..). They have a wide range of weapons to help with that. BBs are designed to be tactically flexible and deadly assets.
Dreadnoughts exist specifically to kill Battleships - and anything else they can get into a side arc and pull up a firing solution on. They have a handful of the biggest guns the designers can fit on board plus a smidgen of AA and anti-light-boat weapons (boarding boats, not PT boats). They're armored hard enough to bounce the light weapons of a BB and survive hits from almost anything but another Dreadnought's guns. Granted, they still have problems with fighters, but that's not why they exist.
Hey NEA, how much you know about IS Clans 3145? We're all ISfagsor homeworlder scumin the TRO crew, and we're trying to work over who get which Clan design.
>>43817920
This sounds like anti-iATM talk here boyo.
since we're all talking WarShips, i've got to ask the classic question: What would it take for WarShips to be viable in the hands of mercenaries (and presumably pirates)?
>>43818103
Didn't we just do this?
Pirates some how take one over via dropship boarding.
Look around go... oh fuck this is expensive, and we are walking targets so get it to another house's area and sell the thing ASAP
>>43816114
>>43816147
Well dammit, looks like NEA got n it before I could.
>>43816340
>From the way you describe them, most battletech designs regardless of alleged class are actually either mediocre destroyers or lousy cruisers, with a bare handful of battleships
Pretty much. I'm a die-hard naval wargamer, but (as I said a few months ago), AeroTech is basically a game of WWI and WWII warships taking on modern air forces, and largely designed by people who didn't actually play the game much. At least it plays smoother than the Star Blazers FBS.. but then, Star Blazers is ruthlessly balanced and actually a lot of fun to play as long as you have strict time limits on turns and fleet captains running small squadrons of ships instead of trying to handle a full fleet on your own.
>>43816759
>how would you classify a warship that mounts a spinal Mass Driver like the Soyal?
As a plot device.
More seriously, a Mass Driver is a shore-bombardment weapon and doesn't really affect the ship's naval role, other than its build requirements and the sacrificed tonnage. Class it as whatever the rest of its armament and layout dictates.
>>43818103
A massive increase in the number of WS and surface-to-space weapons in-universe, to the point where even the minor states and isolated planets don't completely lose their shit over seeing a hull painted in someone else's colors coming into orbit of their world. If every nation has a couple of destroyers or cruisers within easy reach of every vaguely-important star-system, and every planet has its capital city and major centers ringed with surface-to-space batteries that can stand off or destroy one of said cruisers, who'd give a fuck if a bunch of raggedy-ass mercs managed to scrape up a frigate or two?
So, yeah: lots more WarShips, and lots more SDS-style anti-WS batteries on-planet.
>>43818103
To echo the previous response, a way to overcome the limitation that prevents most pirates throughout our history from operating warships: A lack of a sufficiently reliable logistics base to support the operation there of and the notion that you want to board and capture the targets to sell them rather than blow them to smithereens.
>It's hard to sell smithereens.
>>43815558
That image.
>Aegis, what do your elf eyes see?
>>43818103
It would take several things:
1: Availability. WarShips would have to be much more common; at a WarShips-to-regiments ratio of 1:1 or higher, not just for the houses but generally, enough would be around that mercenaries could probably pry a few loose.
2: ports willing to service mercenary warships apolitically would have to exist. If none did, every last mercenary warship would fall victim to the company store sooner or later. In a universe designed for mercenary WarShips, outreach might have such a port, along with Solaris VII and maybe Galatea, as would Star's End (which, along with possibly ports on Antillos and maybe in the Tortuga domains would support pirate warships, as well as maybe the occasional desperate or rogue mercenary). A periphery state might provide such services as well, probably the taurians or magistracy (if circinus had a port, they might, too). Also, an industry willing to furnish warship components to mercenaries would have to exist, but it wouldn't be much of a stretch compared to canon.
3: ground to space defenses would have to be better than in canon (which is true of any warship heavy AU), so that the threat of somebody like Gray's Ghosts burning off a city or two for kicks is minimal. If it weren't, everybody would be pretty goddamned unwilling to accept that kind of potential danger, which would make it EXTREMELY difficult for mercenary warships to operate
>>43817920
Well, if you're trying to make it feel like an official TRO, since I'm a Falcon fan, I'd recommend you give all the really well-designed Mechs to the Falcons. That's how TRO unit assignments are supposed to work, right?
>seriously though, send me an email. I leave for family Thanksgiving tomorrow, but I'll try to get to it
>>43818715
We were actually just having trouble with Falcons, so that's convenient.
>>43818188
>>43818190
>>43818284
considering what'd be needed for merc WarShips, what sorts of warships would be most common among mercs?
>>43818715
>Jade Falcons get best Clan stuff because NEA
>FWL get best IS stuff because Munnin and CA
TR: Octarine Burd confirmed.
>>43819420
mostly corvettes, since they would be most common. after that, ancient cruisers and frigates would be next, lots of darts and winchesters and quixotes and congresses and such, as the multipurpose nature would appeal to mercs, and the lodsa extra space would let you install extra crew space for all your dependents and mech repair workshops and spare parts and such, plus supplies so that you can go innaperiphery for years at a time if you have to. also, they have DS collars, so you can carry your DS and mechs with you, rather than a separate, vulnerable JS.
you'd also see a decent number of destroyers, solely because there are a lot of them, but mostly among the folks who do space-only or else the mid-end commands who can get a warship but can't be specific about it
anything beyond a heavy cruiser would be basically unknown; the number of battleships or battlecruisers in merc hands would be extremely rare, with only folks like the Kell Hounds or ELH or Twelfth Star Guard or Hell's Black Aces or the Goons or the Illicen Lancers or such would have them.
honestly, the dart is the ultimate mercenary warship, with the pinto as the vest merc corvette and the Concordat and Congress at the best in-between craft. the Quixote and Aegis get honorable mentions but are a bit too missile/NAC heavy
>>43819493
>yfw TRO Jihad II: Revenge of the Master
>>43820029
blake akbar
battlebump
Way to kill the thread with your big-ass rational post of facts and interesting thoughts, NEA. Just troll like the rest of us so the damn thing doesn't fall off the board.
Hey NEA.
The Centauri at the height of their power invade the Inner Sphere at the height of the Star League.
Who wins?
>>43822032
o.O
Whomever's left to pick up the pieces. Probably the Clan/Shadow Alliance.
>>43822091
What was the Star League navy's size like at its height? Including memberstates?
In the Centauri trilogy books endorsed by JMS as canon, the Centauri have more than 3,000 capital ships in the B5 era. So at their height probably many times more.
On the ground I don't think they have an army that could match the SLDF or mechs, so they might end up mass driving every world that resists.
It'd make for a fun alternate universe.
>>43815627
I really enjoy how much variety that artist put into the engine configurations in that TRO
>>43822236
The SLDF alone had 3k-ish, plus roughly 1000 in everybody else's hands put together. You can also throw in the absolutely horrifically deadly SDS system which ate hundreds and hundreds of warships for breakfast. Also, one can never rule out missile-armed DropShips, especially with nuclear warheads, not to mention squadrons of bizarrely tough ASFs, also slinging nukes, which could even up the odds some
Would it be better to have a carrier that mounts a bunch of collars and carries its ASFs in the DropShips, only having a limited amount of fighter bays to pick up fighters that lose their droppers, or is it just better to carry all the fighters internally and use the collar tonnage to carry fuel and more fighters?
![[SaHa] Mind Control 03.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/sh1XNVg.jpg "[SaHa] Mind Control 03.jpg")
You are piloting your mech one day when tentacles invade your cockpit. What do you do?
>>43824326
>What do you do?
Eject before all hope is lost.
>>43824326
Wonder how the squids got out of hyperspace.
>>43824269
It's a tough one; ASF carrier DS are usually not that tough, so you've got to balance more fighters against the chance of loosing the whole fighter complement (of the DS) to a single lucky hit, while a carrier WS can be tougher
>>43824326
waifu it and ntr best girl in the process
>>43824498
You disgust me in ways that I can't even express in english
>>43824671
neg Star colonel! you just do not comprehend the intrinsic values of foreign genepools
>>43824753
Ah, of course only a trashborn like you could conceptualize such a abomination as
>NTR best girl
>>43823802
>not to mention squadrons of bizarrely tough ASFs
This. Those things are basically armoured PT boats.
Which TRO has the worst art?
>>43826671
Original 3058.
>>43826671
Project Phoenix. The only thing I liked out of that was the Phoenix Hawk, the rest are just flat out bad.
>>43826671
Original 3055
>>43826671
Overall, 3067 or the original 3055. 3067 has a few really attractive designs scattered through it, but the bad shit is so very, very fucking bad - and there's a lot of it. It's not helped by the "All Vees must look completely fucking retarded" edicts from the era, either. Then, there's Chaffee's shitty Lumpy Space Princess section in the back. Most of the fighters look like they were excreted. At least some of the warship designs look decent.
On the other hand, there is very little in 3055o that looks good. Even the otherwise-decent ones usually have basic artistic errors (look at the heads and upper bodies of most of the lights and lighter mediums). They used shitty sub-MS Paint-tier computer drawing software for a quarter of the designs. Even worse, the interstital plates (all signed "Geier", which matches none of the artists in the credits..) are actually pretty good - which means they essentially fucked everything else up that badly >on purpose<. I mean, seriously, this is really good for wargame art, especially in the era.
Overall, I'd have to say 3055, but it's a pretty close call.
>>43827211
>not knowing who Earl Geier is
Pretty much the best artist BT had for interiors in the early 90s and late 80s. I'd say now too, but only because I think the newer art is too clean, and not Mad Max enough.
>>43827290
My point was more that they fucked over the best artist in the TRO by leaving him out of the credits entirely.
>>43827407
>Vindicator in MWO dot jpeg
>>43826671
Everything post 3050 and pre 3075
>MFW the Vulpes is basically a better Falconer
>>43827679
It's easy with Clantech
>>43827290
Speaking of Mad Max, I watched it for the first time last Saturday. The movie and the setting isn't bad, but it doesn't make sense for a Sci Fi game. Even worse, rule-wise 3025 is nothing like Mad Max. What's the point of playing space Mad Max if most of the games don't replicate the most important aspect of the film. Early Dark Age is more Mad Max than 3025
>>43827817
3025 is shit, Jihad best era. Don't waste your time trying to figure out what the fuck 3025 grogs are thinking, because they aren't.
>>43827949
>Jihad best era
Blakist plz
>>43827817
When people talk about "Mad Max" as a setting, they usually mean Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome. Mad Max itself is basically a prequel to the actual universe. In BT terms, the first movie is set a few years before the first Succession War, while the remainder are set deep into the 3rd. "Fury Road" is about the Water Cartels, before the advent of the Great Houses.
>>43827949
Don't be that fag.
>>43827949
found the blakist
>>43828119
Don't be a muh3rdSWfag
>>43828223
>>43827976
Jihad is the best era because everyone is involved, unlike every other era up to the DA, which is the second best.
>>43828266
derp age is kinda the worst. It's getting better in some areas.
>tfw /btg/ has made you a Blakist
>>43828739
>>43828625
Dark Age offers the best gameplay, with a shitton of options available to play. That's why DA is my favorite era
>>43828739
Embrace Blakes truth
>>43828625
fuck that new age of warring states is great
>>43829255
it's meh at best
>>43829535
At least we can all agree that the dark age has produced the best minis by wide margin
>>43829600
There are a lot of great rides, I'll agree. It's not like I haven't played it too, I'm just not impressed with a lot of the setting. Maybe this is how 3025 grogs felt about the Clan Invasion.
>>43829423
I think the Shiro might have pulled its weight...
>>43829691
>>43829423
>but 3145 Drac stuff is shit!
I would say that dark age has a lot of interesting ideas that were rather badly executed. Better writers would have made it an easy contender for the best era, that's for sure
Well... I'm back in.
I bought the current Intro Boxed set.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the plastic minis are A). tons better than the original Total War intro box and B). the 'better' plastic minis are a Mad Cat and a Battlemaster, right?
What ever happened to the Thor/Loki from the last version? Can you get them anywhere?
>>43830154
I agree. It definitely has a lot of interesting ideas, but the execution leaves it as the derp age.
>>43830224
I got the Thor/Loki set but now I wish I'd gotten the Timber Wolf/BattleMaster set because NEA's guide only does the BattleMaster version.
>download Aurora because the SPACE ROME game here
>look at name themes
>House Marik
We PURPLE BIRD now.
>>43830300
Having both sets I can with some authority tell you that outside the two 'premium' 'Mechs they're functionally identical.
>Except the newer boxes production value on the figures is significantly superior.
>Also, look for a defect, any defect at all in the figures to cash in on CGL sending you a second set.
>>43830534
If the production value is significantly higher then they aren't functionally identical imo
>>43830534
Abusing company goodwill is a surefire way to make it stop
>>43829600
>the dark age has produced the best minis by wide margin
Age of War, man. Less Wizkids feces hanging around, and you can't tell me that the Primitive Rifleman isn't one of the sexiest models ever made.
>>43830224
>What ever happened to the Thor/Loki from the last version? Can you get them anywhere?
Catalyst made them as spec models for a Clan reissue back like seven years ago. They sold them direct for a little while, then threw most of the remaining stock in the 25th anniversary box once the Unseen thing and the Clan box both fell through. They stopped selling the Thor and Loki shortly thereafter. Your best bet is to stalk Amazon or Ebay for loose models - the 25th anniversary box models are otherwise pretty shit.
>>43830300
On the bright side, once the Alpha Strike set comes out we can make a whole new starter guide that will have a better Beemer model in it anyway (take a peek at the cover of the IntOps beta, because Rolling Thunder).
>>43830300
>NEA's guide
*woosh*
Sorry, that's the sound of that going right over my head. What's NEA's guide?
>>43830534
>>Also, look for a defect, any defect at all in the figures to cash in on CGL sending you a second set.
How do I do this? A couple of my mechs were broke when I bought it.
>>43830678
Do we know anything about the Alpha Strike box?
It seems like one of those products that will never come out (last time I was doing anything BTech related the Clan box was going to be the next best thing).
>>43830682
The attached. (Is there a newer version than 3.2?)
Are mercs in the Dark Age still stuck with level 1 tech?
>>43830597
Oh, like most B-Tech players actually do anything to finish their figures. Paint essentially doesn't happen. It's just a token and could easily be a card stock standee.
>>43830625
>Meh, I got mine. Though I did protest only legitimate defects, like that one mech whos legs I had to glue back together and was extraordinarily surprised when they sent me a complete new set.
>>43830733
It will apparently have the new Unseen models for figures.
>>43830689
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=16789.0
Don't expect them to get back to you, and give them at least a month to ship any minis you need replaced. If you don't hear back after a month, post about it on the main forums or something. I got my replacements after about two weeks.
>>43830625
Ironically, I've had several severe defects in the boxed sets I did get. One was missing the Cyclops outright, and had a Hunchback with an underpour that left it without a gun or leg; there was also an underpoured Atlas. Another was missing one of the Awesome's arms, the Enforcer had an offset miscast of like 2mm and had an extra Cicada but no Assassin. The current set didn't have any of those errors, but even after making repeated requests back in the day I never got replacements.
>>43830748
Nope. Most are equipped almost entirely with 3050-3067 era tech, and even decent quantities of clantech and high-tech stuff. By this point even the rim collection and marians have plenty of level 2 tech, mercs are up to their ears in it
>>43830828
And good riddance to all that old shit
>>43830747
Sweet. Thanks for that. Very helpful.
>>43830803
The Alpha Strike boxes don't have the same problem, do they?
>>43830748
They haven't been since like 3055, m8
>>43830936
Not in my experience. But like >>43830803 said the current boxes have a lot fewer errors in them than the old stuff.
>>43830733
>Do we know anything about the Alpha Strike box?
Currently, not much.
It's supposed to be a Company-vs.-Binary setup, all Unseen versus first-wave Omnis. That both leaves out many of the classic Unseen and a few of the Clanner 'Mechs - I suspect the remainder will go into some kind of supplementary boxed set like the current Alpha Strike Lance Packs but there's no confirmation of that.
So far, we've had art posted of the Beemer (probably), Ostscout, Warhammer, Griffin, Shadow Hawk, two different Locust variants (the Wilson's Hussars pic in the merc book clearly shows a -1E), Marauder, and Rifleman. That's potentially eight out of the twelve that are supposed to be in the set, although my brain keeps nagging me that I'm forgetting something. Anyway, they're almost certainly doing the ones that will be in the boxed set first, just so they can get the molds cut quickly.
As far as timing, nobody knows. We already have a batch of Warhammer test models up, and going from a 3D master print to a cut mold usually only takes a couple months (despite what Kevin "it's not my fault" Sembieda might claim).
I personally wouldn't be surprised to see the boxed set come out just after Gen Con next year, especially with how hard the Battletech kickstarter just won everything. If they have any sense at all they're going to want to capitalize on that shit as hard and fast as possible.
>>43831071
We haven't gotten the new Rifleman art yet
>>43830936
>The Alpha Strike boxes don't have the same problem, do they?
Nothing I've bought since the new boxed set came out* has had any errors. In fact, they're generally better quality than Iron Wind Metals is putting out right now; less flash, the mold misalignments are down into single-digit micrometers, and the detail is universally well-cut even if it's not the crispest. Some of the poses are a little silly, because everything is coming out of a 2-part mold, but frankly they're way easier to work with and/or fix than some twelve-part metal abomination.
*so far - Pursuit, Recon, Command and Assault lance packs, plus myself and two friends each bought the intro box and checked out all those minis.
>>43831115
>We haven't gotten the new Rifleman art yet
I was under the impression that this was Shimmy's. Think I may have gotten an MWO update mixed in again, then.
>>43831182
Naw, that's flyingdebris' work
>>43831071
> If they have any sense at all
That might be a bit much to hope for
>>43830875
I dunno, a lot of the 3025 designs have a certain feel to them that many of the refits and newer designs lack and that I'm kinda fond of, like old cars, in a way
>captcha 3043
>>43831182
Not gonna lie, I get a chub every time I see this thing.
>>43831182
Thats flyingdebris not shimmy shams
>>43831222
>>43831305
Still, we do have this - and it's already appeared (albeit from a PoV >inside< the cockpit) on a canon work.
>>43831323
The aforementioned work.
>>43831323
That's pretty fikkin nice. I personally think that the barrels should all be the same length but otherwise 10/10
>>43830678
>Nelson mini
>good
>Wizkids models after Age of Darkness
>bad
Double meme'd, my friend
>>43830733
>>43830752
>>43831071
>>43831182
Pretty sure it's been thrown around by official people to confirm the AS box set is IS Classics vs Clans, just buried in the official forums.
There's extra art confusion going around with the classics project tipping the confidence scales for PGI to release all their FD versions. The MWO stuff wont be CGL/IWM minis as I'm covering the designs on that end.
If you see square laser barrels, it's MWO.
>>43831323
Mine here should largely survive going official, as most have so far minus the all fresh Marauder.
>We're gonna look back and remember the days when we didn't know when/if we'd get something better than project phoenix.
Why did everyone send in 6/9 stealthy cap mechs? We have like 3 of them, two of them very similar "6/9 stealth with one big gun" designs.
Is there a funner BT novel than "Star Lord"?
Who the fuck is this guy? 9000 posts and it's the first time I've ever seen of him.
>>43833834
>Who the fuck is this guy? 9000 posts and it's the first time I've ever seen of him.
Well, you could check his post history to find out, instead of asking /tg/ to be your personal army..
>>43833863
>personal army
Nice meme m8
Reading his posts ain't gonna tell me who the guy actually is. He a longtime battletech volunteer or something? MUL?
>>43833936
>Reading his posts ain't gonna tell me who the guy actually is.
You'd be surprised.
>He a longtime battletech volunteer or something? MUL?
Hmm....
>Custom Title says "Booth Monkey"
Maybe he's the main guy doing set-up and take-down of the CGL booth at conventions? Wild guess.
so, /btg/, how would you fix the NON-FACTION aspects of the dark age?
>>43834571
Such as?
>>43834584
stone's disarmament scheme, the RoTS' issues that nobody seems to address, tech-level weirdness, the seeming total lack of the primitive-tech shit that was built by the passel during the jihad, the effects of the HPG blackout, the naval nonsense, stuff like that
Does the -2 penalty to shots by a unit firing TSEMP last until the next turn?
>>43834646
>Stone's disarmament scheme
I think they should have done something more like UN peace keepers, where the other states contribute a unit or two and rotate troops through it as a prestige post or something. The RotS would have its own forces, but this would give them more units. It sets the stage for issues that led to the whole RotS disintegrating and also make more sense in terms of overall unit levels - people didn't disarm, they just seconded troops to the RotS at varying levels. Also, the Capellans (and maybe Dracs) getting a huge advantage from hiding stuff away is, imo, really dumb. So just drop that entirely.
>RotS issues
I think they really explained far too much about what the Republic is up to both within the Wall and outside it. What they should have done is something where the space behind the wall is a complete mystery. The Wall goes up, and 10 years later, the Wall starts slowly expanding, one planet at a time. Garbled reports come in of mass assaults, shortly before all communication is lost. It might still be the Republic, it might be the return of hyperspace Blakists, and someone on the lunatic fringe claims a hyperspace monster thinks humans are tasty and is eating every human world. Behind the scenes, the Republic would have some way to expand the wall, but they would have to land on the target planet and set something up so that there's a chance to repel them before they can get it active. Although nobody in universe would know this for a good while. I would also drastically rein in their false flag ops, because the way they're written now it's incredibly obvious it's the Republic.
>tech level weirdness
Not sure what you mean here
>lack of primitive tech
The sphere has been at peace for 65 years or so, nobody should still be using it.
>effects of HPG blackout
Again, which aspect exactly?
>naval nonsense
You mean the near-total absence of ships?
Fuck that noise, everyone should have a decently sized navy.
>>43835174
by stone's disarmament scheme, I meant why in the blue hell would anydamnbody do anything except bury their mechs, pay lip service and pretend to be peaceful, which DA singularly fails to address the why beyond "everybody who mr.deck doesn't like is dumb enough to fall for it"
>RoTS issues
that is to say, why absolutely no internal or external opposition to "we're gonna take all the mechwarrior families' mechs"/ HAHA TIME FOR ETHNIC CLEANSING" and such exists
>lack of primitive tech
it's not like the successor stats or ESPECIALLY the periphery and mercs have ever thrown a single combat unit out in their entire history, so where exactly did all the primitives go? (granted, this could be considered a subset of the disarmament thing)
>naval nonsense
yeah, pretty much what you said. there should be WarShips all over the damn place
hi guys
my favorite is the mortal combat one :D
>>43835926
0.5/10, there's a chance that if you learn and practice, you could genuinely b8 one day, but not likely
>>43835963
Come on, it's at least a 2/10, you responded after all.
shit boys, being as it seems that all three or four of the /btg/ warship crew are here, I present the most exclusive design challenge: build a possible statline for the Peregrine-class (that is to say, a sub-200kt clan WarShip that is inferior to the Fredasa but still almost viable in the context of old SLDF ships)
>>43835963
I'm done now
>>43836008
Thanks man
>>43836008
>>43836065
nah, a 1/10 at most. it's that I feel an an obscure need to teach folks how to b8 /btg/.
next time, mention the taurians. at the very lest, you will get CampaignAnon into a autismal rage, but if you be lucky, you might catch a few other anons
>>43836109
I don't ever usually b8, so I felt the need to make it abundantly obvious what it was. If I was to seriously attempt it I would ramp up the subtlety a lot more.
>>43835963
>>43836008
>>43836109
I'm just wondering is it some reference I'm missing here?
Because all I'm doing is thinking of a Scorpion loaded with harpoon SRMs.
>>43836170
Is it bait if I just have no idea what you're on about?
>>43836109
>Please notice me sempai!
>>43836109
If you figure out who to stroke around here you may eventually into master baiting.
Why do the trolls seem to target NEA and CA over the others?
>>43836427
que?
and for that mattter, for the clanners and CA I say Me cago en la leche de su padre cobarde cabrone y el SLDF
>>43836544
'Cause they have a persistent identity that they get touchy about and an easily targeted investment in the game/setting.
>TL,DR: They're comparatively easily trolled.
>>43836570
Yes but why not Muninn or Neph or Xotl?
>>43836544
NEA? I have no conception as to why one would wish to troll him besides his love for the MoC, which is disliked because it encapsulates all the things that /btg/ professes to hate in a faction yet does not experience any bad thing nor much dislike for that.
as for CA, he is easy to troll. mention the taurian concordat in a positive light or mention nukes at all outside of the SLDF and he is like to have his booty bothered to heights unseen outside of the official forums. shit, I trolled him into an autismal rage without even meaning to, without even mentioning the TC
>>43836583
>muninn
because the FWL has been so fucked in canon that trolls have not a thing to work with
>neph
really, I dunno, perhaps he doesn't factionpost enough?
>Xotl
because he has never done anything wrong, even to the worst of factionfag trolls
>>43836583
Muninn just trolls right back, Nephanim doesn't have anything he's identifiably interested in, and Xotl isn't around much.
>>43836583
Their names hadn't came up yet.
>Also, from what I've seen Xotl might actually be worthy of some small measure of non-contempt.
>>43836617
So far aside from CA's weird obsession with drone warships I haven't seen him say much about any one faction, and only saw him whining about the Taurians once, but whatever. Probably annoying to play with or against though.
>>43836738
I've seen him do it a few times over the last few months, and a bit more besides
the fact is, nobody in the last few weeks has said anything along the lines of "the taurian concordat deserves better than XIN SHENG and getting fistfucked to death" and therefor he hasn't been triggered yet
As for the drone thing, it's simply his version of "the SLDF wins everything forever", not much more
>>43835174
>Also, the Capellans (and maybe Dracs) getting a huge advantage from hiding stuff away is, imo, really dumb. So just drop that entirely.
Worked for Armanis already. And for the Blakists.
>>43832789
Cause we are all unoriginal dickweeds and do you really think /btg/ will suffer suboptimal stuff in their pet project?
>>43837085
>6/9
>optimal
Uh
>>43837102
I've actually been liking 6/9 more lately. You can turn and walk for 5, or turn 2 and run for 7. The walking + turn is especially helpful. It might not be *quite* as good as 5/8 or 7/11, but I rate it higher than I used to. I feel like it's a good middle ground for upper-end mediums and lower-end heavies.
>>43837174
>I feel like it's a good middle ground for upper-end mediums and lower-end heavies
Jesus, if that's a "middle ground" what's your high end for heavies? I consider a 6/9 65-tonner to be pretty fast.
>>43834571
>so, /btg/, how would you fix the NON-FACTION aspects of the dark age?
Not write every goddamned sourcebook and XTRO from the perspective of the Republic, for a start. I get that they have to tarnish the RotS as much as possible, but some kind of view from outside the Fortress would be nice, you know?
Second, I'd actually do some work on the Periphery. ISP IV is something I'd actually give them some fucking money for, especially if it's partly about how people are trying to figure out what's up with the Fortress. Maybe some stuff about what life is like now that the HPG grid is fucked from the point of view of a working organization rather than a drunken academic trying to hit a page-count quota. Then there's all those neat conspiracies and world-building they could be following up on. And an entire faction that literally has no fluff whatsoever. Maybe it could get some pages
>>43834646
> the seeming total lack of the primitive-tech shit that was built by the passel during the jihad
Largely solved by
>Stone's disarmament scheme
>the RoTS' issues that nobody seems to address
Which ones? I mean, most of it can be written off as panicky people seeing their Grand Design come completely fucking unglued when it comes in contact with actual people. People who don't want to be forcibly disarmed, resettled, and have their culture and customs annihilated by a government that claims to be acting in their interests. Then they see the magical happy realm of Stone and the Tree Friends be completely unable to defend itself - or them - in any meaningful way. The Senate freaks the fuck out, the Knights assume they have a divine mandate, and everything goes to shit.
>>43837312
(continued)
>>43834646
>tech-level weirdness
I'm actually okay with having wildly disparate tech available throughout the Sphere. Communications are fucked, the central governments of most of the states are in massive turmoil, if they even still exist, and frankly most planets are kind of doing their own thing. I'd be weirded out >more< if tech was uniform.
>the effects of the HPG blackout
Like I said earlier, I think it'd make more sense if we got to see it in a practical, on-the-ground kind of way instead of abstracted to the point of non-existence.
>the naval nonsense
Tell Herb back in '02 that WarShips are an important part of the setting, and he can jolly well get fucked with a cactus if he's not creative enough to understand why they can co-exist with 'Mechs without obviating the entire setting. Then overhaul the naval combat rules a bit. Maybe kill off most of the old guard of ships in the Jihad and design some new stuff that doesn't have paper armor and no AA cover.
New Flashman's looking pretty good.
>>43837487
It's not terrible. Definitely a step up from most battletech minis
>>43837312
6/9 is a good speed for 50-60 tons or so, meaning that the speed and weight class is a good compromise between faster, lighter mechs and slower, heavier 5/8 cav mechs. I might occasionally make or use a 7/11 mech of that tonnage but only for some specific purpose, like a melee machine that needs to get a headcapping hatchet or something.
>Not write every goddamned sourcebook and XTRO from the perspective of the Republic, for a start.
This, so much this.
>>43837312
>ISP IV is something I'd actually give them some fucking money for, especially if it's partly about how people are trying to figure out what's up with the Fortress. Maybe some stuff about what life is like now that the HPG grid is fucked from the point of view of a working organization rather than a drunken academic trying to hit a page-count quota. Then there's all those neat conspiracies and world-building they could be following up on. And an entire faction that literally has no fluff whatsoever. Maybe it could get some pages
All this too.
>>43831390
Me too, I want same length barrels, it's just... not right otherwise.
I have been reading through Tactical Operations looking at the Battle Armor design rules and have a question, does putting a mechanical jump booster on a BA confer 1 jump or does that need to be purchased separately at the standard rate?
playing around with a Tengu variant that could be useful after it drops it's ML.
>>43838112
>does putting a mechanical jump booster on a BA confer 1 jump
Yep. I don't think it's cumulative with other Jump equipment (Jets, Booster, Partial Wing) though.
>>43836672
I hardly ever fucking post anymore, honestly. Some dumb shit at my workplace got IP banned (from the looks of it, from something done on /pol/ no less), so I'm relegated to the odd hours of the day where I'm not either at work or pleasing the wife.
If you really want some material on me though, I like the MoC, or at least I used to before they latched onto XinSheng cock like it had the antidote.
Primarily, I liked that they were peacemongers in a wargame that hardly ever did anything militarily, but kept safe through spies, blackmail, black-ops, and having a specific brand of "commerce" that their neighbors enjoy, but can't just take by force. The fact that they Got Gud after joining the Alliance just kind of turned them into yet another wargame faction... With blackjack and whores.
>>43838397
>likes a faction
>for not fighting
>in a war game
The fuck wrong wit you boy
>>43837487
Could be better, could be worse.
>>43837487
Doing a franken-flashman? Or is that a sculpt from somewhere I don't know about? Either way, it looks good.
>>43836728
You know, there's another name that hasn't been mentioned...
>Nuke Clan Snow Magpie, so bad the only spheroids they could conquer were the Space Amish!
>>43839210
Are the proto-mech worth anything?
>>43838397
Yeah. I'm not a huge MoC fan, but I liked them a lot better before they became the CapCon's strategic pussy reserve and were an actual faction
>>43839371
New resculpt from fan funding.
>>43834913
Yes. I'm not sure what you're confused about here, what would the alternative be?
>>43841396
Play them right and they're worth their weight in gold.
>>43841396
Clan ones yes, they bulk up out-numbered forces and can act as mobile supporting units. IS ones remain to be seen.
Are their bomb options in battletech aside from "regular" iron bombs and thermobaric? Anything guided so as to get a little more use out of TAG?
Hi /btg/ I'm writing my AU were the SLDF exodus goes the right way and they get absorbed by the Taurians who end up with clan-tech, do you guys have any idea on how to flesh it out?
>>43841843
Yep, check out TacOps
>43841872
Cowboy shaped protomechs.
Scaring the feds so bad that they literally just give back all the planets
The protector taming the magistrix with his dick
50 omnimech factories
You know, the usual
>>43841966
>Cowboy shaped protomechs.
Now this I like.
>>43841843
In addition to the standard HE bombs, Cluster and Laser-guided bombs are in Total Warfare. Page 246 has the details.
>>43841909
>>43842050
Thanks guys. Things are looking up for the OA now
>>43842038
Cowboy shaped protomechs are one the two decent ideas that medron pryde has ever had, it's true
>>43841872
0/10 I'm not CA so what the fuck's the point of this bait anyway?
>>43842305
The TC Auroch is them looking at a Minotaur and deciding they can do one better, huh. It's a 15 ton behemoth of a Proto with a Blazer in its main gun. The torso has a Bulls head motif.
>>43842685
>Blazer as a main gun
What. Assuming it has clantech sinks, that thing weighs 13 tons by itself.
>>43842726
Okay then, not a Blazer as the main gun.
What energy weapon is better than a ML and can fit on a 15 ton chassis?
>>43842763
Forgot to add; And is available in the TC?
>>43842763
An ER Medium. Technically an ER Large is only 5 tons. Some Improved Heavy Mediums if you want to be a clantech fuckwit.
>>43842778
Don't forget the heat sinks. An ER Medium on a Proto is 2.25 tons while an ER Large is 8 tons.
>>43842778
The other TC Proto Idea I had simply mounts a SRM-6 in each arm, fed from the side torsos.
>>43842778
The ER medium is 2.25 tons which is and not that bad.
A large would be 7 tons, which is a lot. ER larges are 8.
Not that this matters because IS protos are a retarded idea.
>>43842810
So two ER meds+Sinks is 4.5 Tons? that leaves you, what , 11.5 tons to work with and fit everything else, should be to hard to balance your books.
>>43842811
SRM-6s are too heavy to mount in a Proto's arm.
>>43842815
>Not that this matters because IS protos are a retarded idea.
>retarded idea.
Do you know which general you are in? Also these are Periphery Protos, which is a totally different kettle of custard.
>>43842852
cock, well, how about SRM-2s then?
>>43842868
You can mount weapons up to 1000 kg in weight on Ultraheavy arms, 500 kg if a standard Proto.
>>43842856
Oh yes, the people that have a less advanced industry and tech base than the people that have a less advanced industry and tech base than the people that still can only just barely justify constructing and fielding protomechs.
>>43842890
So thats two Clan SRM-2s or a single IS model?
>>43842906
To be blunt a Periphey Proto is either an Ultralight with no Aircon or a BA with Gigantism.
>>43842948
>So thats two Clan SRM-2s or a single IS model?
Yessir
>>43842996
Excellent...The Deadeye will be simply perfect..
>>43843014
Wait up, sorry. Forgot something - you can only mount one weapon per arm. So that'd be a single Clan SRM-4; two cSRM-2s per arm wouldn't work.
>>43843081
fairy nuff
>>43843081
Ah well, nay bother. End result is roughly the same.
>>43842948
The main point I am attempting to make is that the tech does not exist, and it isn't in the tube either. nor would a proto stuck using IS tech even bring much of anything to the table that you can't do with bugs, bugs loaded with rocket launchers, or BA with magclamps attached to bugs loaded with rocket launchers.
It wouldn't even be cheaper either. To overcome the relatively larger weight of the IS tech base, you'd have to make the protos like 15 tons. Which is pretty much "why not just build a bug" weight. And that tonnage also means you either accept that they move at 4/6 or slower, or jam it full of technologically complex and nonexistent IS protomech IJJs.
>>43843530
A man can dream though, even if that dream is a pipe dream.
>Amaris is atheist
THE ULTIMATE FEDORA
>>43843530
Of course that technology exists. VDNI is IS tech anyways. It's advanced but hardly beyond their ability, certainly within the grasp of any major power.
>>43843732
Nah, I'd say that Nicky K has him beat
Also, it occurs to me that the secret to building IS protos would really just be to figure out how to build sub-1t gyros; if they did, the heavier protos would be fairly IS-viable IMO
>>43838356
it stacks with Partial Wing but not Jets or Booster.
>>43838553
Even at the time of that posting, you were not the first person to have said that to me today.
>>43841436
See though, it's like this, before they had spies and melting-pot culture, and blackmail holding their semi-hostile neighbors orders of magnitude their size at bay. Before the only reason they had for even hiring mercs was to fight off pirates and slavers and other shit too blatant and overt for the spec ops guys to face. See, they were a sidebar to the setting, but they had flavor outside of the matriarchy (which I only tolerated because of their interesting points). All that flavor just drained away when they joined the Trinity Alliance.
And so they became what they've been meme'd to be. A less interesting TC with fetishes and SJW shenanigans.
I'm a fan of the MoC the way they used to be, but damn if I can't see any for them to get back to that. But every other faction is also bad, and should feel bad, so I stick with the whore faction pining for the days when they were better..
>>43844136
>the secret to building IS protos would really just be to figure out how to build sub-1t gyros
Pretty sure the Interface Cockpit has you covered, bro. Zero gyro at all is as much 'sub 1T' as you can get.
>>43845407
>Zero gyro at all is as much 'sub 1T' as you can get.
Dude, build the Gyro out of Anti-matter and try to argue it has negative mass!
>>43841614
Do they last for one turn (the one in which you fired it), or two
>>43845479
Nah son, negative matter has positive mass. Negative mass is the annihilation condition that you can get from antimatter (or fission or fusion) that causes all that energy to just happen out of nowhere.
Now you know.
Hey, can somebody screencap NEA's warship thingies upthread so I can get a copy of it after the holiday? I'm stuck on a mobile at my folks' place and can't really do it well.
>>43845407
I was thinking of a cheaper and not-pilot-killing way of doing things, and one that doesn't rely on blakist sorcery. >>43845366
It isn't that I don't believe you, but I can't say I remember reading about blackmail being a major component of the MoC's national defense strategy. Where does that stuff and indeed a lot of the spy stuff come from? I don't remember much about it in the first two periphery books, which are the only major pre-xin sheng sources that I can think of
>>43846216
I can do it in like an hour? I'm on mobile too, right now but I can later. Watch this space
>>43846230
>I was thinking of a cheaper and not-pilot-killing way of doing things
That just depends on which state is making them. I can't imagine the Marians, Capellans, Dracs, or even certain FWL statelets would really give a shit about pilots burning out after a few years, if they wanted those units. All you need is a disposable population of sub-class citizens.
>>43846246
Thank you. No sense in letting something that useful fall off and get lost.
>>43816147
>Dreadnought (DN)
I honestly think you should figure out that D means destroyer hull. Unless you mean to confuse me it should be B (BN)
>>43845366
> Before the only reason they had for even hiring mercs was to fight off pirates and slavers and other shit too blatant and overt for the spec ops guys to face.
Well, that and invading the CapCon. Seriously, the magistracy is historically better suited to the taurian jihad plot than the taurians were
(Although I actually really like the slight hint of expantionist and bite-off-more-than-they-can-chew that the magistracy had. Had interesting possibilities
>>43846330
Destroyer is generally DD, with a third letter after that for special use. I've only ever seen DN for dreadnought.
>>43846285
The thing is, those that wouldn't care about the pilot-killing would also be the ones who wouldn't be able to build the requisite tech, and those that COULD wouldn't be willing to use it
>>43846467
What would the designation for a specialized ELINT craft like the bug-eye and nightwing be?
>>43846330
Naval wargamer here. Dreadnoughts don't have a classification like BB or DD or FFG. Historically, dreadnoughts are just a subtype of battleship, and as such their classification code remained "BB". For example, the USS Iowa is a dreadnought, and its code is BB-61. This was because, again historically, once dreads came out they obsoleted all the normal battleships, and so there was no need to give them a separate code, because from that point forward, basically all new construction was in dreadnought-style hulls.
However, in the Battletech universe as it applies to warships, the above is not necessarily true. The difference between ordinary battleships and dreadnoughts under NEA's classification seems to be great enough that a different code is required, not least because both BBs and dreads would be being built simultaneously (so you couldn't rely on any BBs being built after date X being dreadnoughts, the way you could historically). DN is an extremely common abbreviation for dreadnought in naval sci-fi. David Weber uses it in the Honorverse, for example. I don't feel that his use of DN is inappropriate for the universe; while "everyone does it" isn't really a good defense, everybody else in naval sci-fi does, in fact, do it.
>>43846216
I'm not >>43846246, but here you go.
>>43846567
>What would the designation for a specialized ELINT craft like the bug-eye and nightwing be?
The real-world designation for ships like that is AGI - "intelligence collection ship".
>>43846623
Well thanks, you've saved me some work
Have an elemental as thanks
>>43845636
It effects you as long as it would the target. ie: until the end of the next turn's end step.
>>43846468
Dracs, FWL and Capellans could build it. Hell, even Marians have home made battle armor designs. And the republic has shown plenty of willingness to sacrifice people too. Really anyone could if they wanted to.
>>43846622
If everybody in naval sci-fi does it, then everyone in naval sci-fi is, in fact, wrong. Stop using it.
>>43847050
Generally accepted conventions become generally accepted conventions by general consensus.
You are the wrong one in this instance
>>43847749
What on earth are you talking about? It's not magic, it's technology that's already all over the inner sphere.
>>43847775
I think he meant to respond to >>43847082
>>43847790
That would make more sense.
>>43847813
Is this MadCap's RL picture?
>>43848113
No, it's a troll, you idiot.
>>43848350
That doesn't mean it's not, though.
>>43839210
Looks good, and closer to the TRO 2750 art than the original mini did...still, I'd prefer the redesigns we've seen here instead.
>>43837487
Those details look really shallow. And the body looks mirrored, which feels lazy.
>>43848829
Anyone capable of naming the mech clinging to the Flashmans leg?
>>43849116
Mongoose.
>>43849080
And yet I'm OK with it since it looks loads better than the original mini.
>>43849122
Ah! Now I see it. Thanks. That had been bugging me.
>>43849141
It looks better sure, but it would need a really good paint job to make the details pop.
rolled a random lance:
Phoenix Hawk
Hermes II
Griffin
Wasp
what are some recommended variants through the ages, up to and including the Jihad?
>>43848829
Speaking of the Flashman.
>>43846622
It's not just Weber, either. Babylon 5 had the Nova class dreadnought, which was superseded by the Omega class *destroyer* - a bigger, more heavily armed and more advanced ship, and twice the size of a cruiser (the white one with the lattice-style hull - Hyperion class?)
Then again, in BT, a Major General outranks a Lieutenant General, so the difference between a battleship and a dreadnought might be academic.
>>43849668
>It's not just Weber, either. Babylon 5 had the Nova class dreadnought, which was superseded by the Omega class *destroyer* - a bigger, more heavily armed and more advanced ship, and twice the size of a cruiser
Like many things related to naval strategy, the naming of the Omegas as 'destroyers' was explicitly a political head-fake to get funding and approval for their construction. (See also: Invincible-class 'through-deck cruisers', Russian 'aviation cruisers', Arleigh Burke 'destroyers' that are basically Ticonderoga cruisers that shrank a couple of thousand tons in the wash, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseam....)
Political fuckery going into the design and naming of warships has been a part of the process since before the foundation of history's first standing navy.
>(the white one with the lattice-style hull - Hyperion class?)
Correct. Actually pretty damned good ships, and an EarthForce working-horse during the Dilgar War. The fact that they died in droves against the Minbari was representative only of their being so common and the gross technological overmatch they faced, not any particular flaw in the ships themselves.
>Then again, in BT, a Major General outranks a Lieutenant General, so the difference between a battleship and a dreadnought might be academic.
I think that started as a research derp by FASA, but as noted above, it can be hand-waved away as political interference and cultural/traditional drift.
take your top-5 favorite mechs, pick four, tell us how good of a lance it make
Are there any rules against having a LAM be an Omni? and if not, how would you design a light LAM as battle armor transport and support?
>>43850591
iirc they can't hang on to the outside of flying vees or ASF
>>43850591
>That Airmech
What? They have a Metal Gear? Here?
But seriously you cannae mount Omnipods on a LAM because they interfere with the transformation or some bullshit like that, but in these cases the 'Illegal' quirk is your friend.
>>43850591
are you implying that there's even close to a possibility of LAMs having nice things? not bloody well likely
