Aerotech Rules Additions
tsta...@metgem.gcn.uoknor.edu
into my campaigns. Let me know what you think.
Aerotech Rules Modifications
RECORD SHEETS
The original Aerotech Fighter record sheet will be used for all
fighters.
WEAPON RANGES
The weapons carried by Aerospace fighters are listed as the same
type as on Battlemechs. But one may notice that the distances on
Aerotech maps and Battletech maps are not the same. For example, a
Medium Laser has a range of 9 hexes. This turns out to be 270 meters
on the Battletech map but increases to 4,590 meters on the Aerotech
map. This has caused confusion among many players. But what many
have not realized is that these weapons are used in space where there is
no atmosphere. This will greatly enhance the ranges because ther is
nothing to cause dispersion of beam weapons nor resistance to cannon
shells or missles. The ranges stated are the maximum ranges at which
the weapons are accurate and cause their indicated damage. But when
the aircraft descends to low altitude, the weapons become as standard
Battletech weapons. This means one must get low to be within range of
any ground target. Also, dogfighting will be much closer (one Aerotech
hex is 17 Battletech hexes, which equates to 510 meters.)
AIR-TO-AIR GUIDED MISSLES
Some people may have wondered why aircraft in the 31st century
don't carry some equivalent of the current AIM-9 Sidewinder or AIM-7
Sparrow. Well now they do. The stats for the missles used today are
taken from the Harpoon (tm GDW)modern naval wargame. They include the thrust
rating (there is no overthrust because missles move at a constant speed),
the AMR (the maximum number of facing changes the missle can make
in one turn), the damage done by the missle, the missle homing type, and
the maximum number of turns the missle can fly (since the missle has a
limited amount of fuel it can only fly for a short time.) In order for the
missle to be fired at a target it must obtain lock-on. This is acheived
through a successful gunnery roll (modifiers included). If the lock-on is
successfull the pilot may then fire the missle on the following turn if he
rolls another successful lock-on during that turn. Once the missle is fired
it travels at it's indicated thrust rating directly towards the target
aircraft making only the number of turns indicated by it's AMR if necessary.
If the missle successfully enters the same hex as the target it automatically
explodes (due to a proximity fuse), and one must make a roll to see if it hit
the target. The base for this is 9 minus the missle's AMR plus the number of
turns executed by the target aircraft. If the missle hits, the aircraft takes
the indicated damage of the missle in five-point clusters to the side which
the missle entered. If the missle missed, then no damage is incurred.
---> (BTW: AMR means Atmospheric Maneuverability Rating. I tinkered
with the idea of assigning AMR to aerospace and conventional
fighters, but figuring out a method to do so was kinda hard.
If anybody has any suggestions, feel free to post.)
Infrared Missles (Guidance Type: IRH)
These missles require the firing aircraft to maintain a tailing
position within range of the missle for the missle to obtain lock-on. If the
aircraft falls out of tailing position (i.e. - out of the rear arc of the target
aircraft), lock-on is automatically lost.
Active Radar and Semi-Active Radar Missles
(Guidance Type: ARH and SARH)
These missles follow the general rules for missle firing and hitting.
But SARH missles require the firer to maintain lock-on for the duration
of the missle's flight. If lock-on is lost, the missle self-destructs.
Missle | Guidance | Thrust | AMR | Turns Aloft | Dmg | Tons
------------------|----------|---------|-----|--------------|-----|-------
AIM-9 Sidewinder | IRH | 13 | 6 | 3 | 2 | 0.09
AIM-7 Sparrow | SARH | 18 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 0.25
AIM-54 Phoenix | ARH | 21 | 5 | 19 | 12 | 0.50
AIM-120 AMRAAM | ARH | 21 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 0.17
AA-2 Atoll | IRH | 13 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0.08
AA-6 ? | SARH | 24 | 4 | 4 | 20 | 0.83
AA-7 ? | SARH | 18 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 0.35
AA-8 ? | IRH | 16 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 0.06
---> (BTW: Each missle takes up one hardpoint on the craft.
In other words, NO MISSLE MUNCHKINS!!!! :-p )
AIR-TO-GROUND COMBAT
The Battletech rules for air-to-ground combat offer only two
options, strafing and dive-bombing. While perfectly feasable, there are
other methods which are currently in use in the present. These methods
include toss-bombing and run bombing. Rules are also presented for the
use of cluster munitions.
Run Bombing.
An aircraft that wishes to do run bombing will follow the same
rules as for strafing, but he will only be able to bomb targets along the
hexrow he is moving. The bomber can drop from one to three bombs on
the target. The to-hit roll is the bomber's gunnery with a +2 modifier. If
the bomb hits, the target takes damage as per the dive bombing rules. If
the bomb misses, it will scatter according to the scatter table with the
following modification for direction:
1, 2 - one hexside left of target hex
3, 4 - forward of target hex
5, 6 - one hexside right of target hex
The distance of scatter remains the same. Units can still be hit by a bomb
which scatters and take normal bomb damage.
Units on the ground can fire at the bomber as per the strafing
rules.
Toss Bombing
Toss bombing is a method in which the target aircraft does not
enter the target's board. The bomb is released as the fighter climbs
vertically from near ground level and travels on a ballistic arc towards the
target. This type of bombing is more difficult than any other and
requires a +4 to the gunnery roll plus any aircraft modifiers to hit.
Damage and scatter are worked out as per normal dive-bombing rules.
Units on the board can fire at the bomber with a +6 modifier to their
gunnery if they have a weapon with a maximum range of 18 or more.
Cluster Munitions.
Cluster munitions are bombs which contain many tiny bomblets
which scatter over a wide area. These bombs are treated as 20-point
bombs for thrust re-calculation purposes and they can never be mounted
on a multple rack. Also, they can only be dropped via the run bombing
or dive bombing method.
The to-hit roll with cluster munitions only applies to the target hex
and is calculated as per the method of bombing used. But when the
cluster bomb hits the ground it spreads out into the pattern seen below.
/\ /\ /\ /\ /\
/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \
| | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
/\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\
/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \
| | tgt | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /
\/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/
| | 7 | 8 | 9 | |
\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /
\/ \/ \/ \/ \/
In this example the aircraft is traveling from left to right. Units in
the target hex and hexes 1-3 will be hit by the equivalent of an SRM-10
while units in hexes 4-6 and 7-9 will be hit by the equivalent of an SRM
-6. Each 2-point location is worked out separately with the arc being
determined from the approach direction of the aircraft. Also, one could
use cluster munitions to lay FASCAM rounds. When used in this
method, the target hex and hexes 1-3 will have a 15-point minefield,
while hexes 4-6 and hexes 7-9 contain 10-point minfields. As one can see,
this weapon can wreak havoc on vehicles and lighter mechs.
-Brad Stanley
-tsta...@metgem.gcn.uoknor.edu
-"I'm dispossessed. What's your excuse?"
Chris Meadows
Your supplement is an interesting idea. I, however, do find the
whole idea of the BattleTech system a little laughable.
Here these people are, supposedly light-years ahead of us in tech-
nology, yet they can't seem to make weapons that are up to present-
day standards. Before you start flaming that BattleTech's techno-
logical level has devolved from what it once was due to wars, consider
that even in its prime, the Star League's weapons don't compare to
what we have today. While I don't have the exact stats for BattleTech
here, I believe that the longest-ranged missile there was had some-
thing like a range of what, 10 boards? Whatever happened to ICBMs?
What about even the 50-mile Phoenix missiles that modern-day fighters
carry? I strongly suspect that one of our new F-23 ATFs could take
on a BattleTech aerofighter of equivalent or slightly larger tonnage
and win from miles away on dint of its missiles (whose tracking
systems are also superior to BattleTech's, btw). The same goes for
an M-1 Abrams tank. I have more faith in our high-tech modern-day
army than any BattleTech lance there is.
Robotech...now THAT's another story... ;)
Of course, the weapons thing is just a minor bug, really. What I
really don't like, I have to admit, are the rules. They're overly
complicated, more suited to a strategy game like the ones with all
the little cannons the bad guys play in the movies than to a RPG.
It's just too bloody DRY for my tastes.
Of course, the technology is somewhat hilarious in its own right.
Synthetic muscle fibers? Give me a BREAK... :)
Sorry, this really isn't meant to be a white hot fusion torch-type
flame. I guess I'm just a little fed up with the game, and seeing
so many more messages about IT than about my own favorite mecha games,
Robotech and Mekton. I'll just go back to my corner now... :)
--
Chris Meadows | Robotech/RIFTS/Palladium fanfic author/editor
CHM173S@SMSVMA | They Might Be Giants about Star Trek aliens:
CHM...@VMA.SMSU.EDU | "Everybody wants prosthetic foreheads
CMEA...@NYX.CS.DU.EDU | on their real heads!"
Andrew J Hasara
those aircraft, can someone with "Top Gun" look into that system and see what
it says?
Andy Hasara
has...@gn.ecn.purdue.edu
Robert E Day
(Chris Meadows) writes:
Here we go again!
>Here these people are, supposedly light-years ahead of us in tech-
>nology, yet they can't seem to make weapons that are up to present-
>day standards. Before you start flaming that BattleTech's techno-
>logical level has devolved from what it once was due to wars, consider
>that even in its prime, the Star League's weapons don't compare to
>what we have today. While I don't have the exact stats for BattleTech
>here, I believe that the longest-ranged missile there was had some-
>thing like a range of what, 10 boards? Whatever happened to ICBMs?
>What about even the 50-mile Phoenix missiles that modern-day fighters
[ ... ]
Battletech is a GAME, not a realistic simulation of what warfare will be
like in the future. The ranges, dammage and other stuff are there for
BALANCE and PLAYABILITY.(I thought that we went through this already on
R.G.M and R.G.B).
>Robotech...now THAT's another story... ;)
Not another "my game's better than yours is" Flame war I hope.
>Of course, the weapons thing is just a minor bug, really. What I
>really don't like, I have to admit, are the rules. They're overly
>complicated, more suited to a strategy game like the ones with all
>the little cannons the bad guys play in the movies than to a RPG.
>It's just too bloody DRY for my tastes.
Yes, Battletech IS a STRATEGY WAR GAME. Not everyone loves RPGs, some of us
do, in fact, love a strategy game. I know that is why I play it. I know that
it is not realistic, but then again neither is chess. The lack of realism
does not stop it's playing.
>Of course, the technology is somewhat hilarious in its own right.
>Synthetic muscle fibers? Give me a BREAK... :)
Do you mean to say the idea of giant walking robot war machines is LESS
hilarious than "synthetic muscle fibers"?
>Sorry, this really isn't meant to be a white hot fusion torch-type
>flame. I guess I'm just a little fed up with the game, and seeing
>so many more messages about IT than about my own favorite mecha games,
>Robotech and Mekton. I'll just go back to my corner now... :)
If you don't like reading the posts about Battletech, there is a key on
your terminal, the "K" key I think, that will solve most of the problems.
I know that it works for me, when I don't want to read about Robotech and
Mechton.
If you wish to have more posts about your favorite system, try writing more
yourself. Maybe, others with you interest will follow your example. Writing
Negative posts will only get you placed in peolpe's "kill files" and any good
things you have to say will then be lost.
-
--
If the price that I must pay to obtain my * Robert E. Day/Syr Otto von *
freedom, is to acknowledge that the Gov- * Schwartzkatz, Shire Mugmort *
ernmet was granted the power to infringe * Barony Middle Marches, *
on them, then I am not free. Paul Anderson* Middle Kingdom *
Michael Polis
|> AIR-TO-AIR GUIDED MISSLES
|> Some people may have wondered why aircraft in the 31st century
|> don't carry some equivalent of the current AIM-9 Sidewinder or AIM-7
|> Sparrow. Well now they do. The stats for the missles used today are
|> taken from the Harpoon (tm GDW)modern naval wargame.
Didn't FASA put out a Top Gun boardgame? I seem to remember hearing that
it used similar rules to Aerotech. What did they do for guided missles?
RedSwordTarga
>>Of course, the technology is somewhat hilarious in its own right.
>>Synthetic muscle fibers? Give me a BREAK... :)
>Do you mean to say the idea of giant walking robot war machines is LESS
>hilarious than "synthetic muscle fibers"?
*Grin* You forgot "The flower of life" powering those giant walking
robot war machines. How much more realistic can you get??????
Axly
Chris Meadows
1) If the limited weapon ranges are there for "balance and playability,"
how come Robotech has more relistic weapons ranges (in thousands of
feet for cannons, and in miles for missiles) and is actually a more
playable system than BattleTech? (note: playability is my own opinion)
It is a point I am slightly willing to concede, however, because my
current fave game, Mekton, does have limited weapon ranges much as
does BattleTech. However, it is all that much more playable than
BattleTech, and it openly admits it is stealing its concept from
anime but doesn't directly copy any mecha, while BattleTech hardly
mentions anime (if at all) and steals design after design..
2) Mekton doesn't have myomers. Robotech doesn't have myomers; look
at the illustrations in the Macross book under "mechanical engineer"
OCC and you'll see a lot of complicated-looking hydraulic-electronic
stuff. I will concede that Protoculture is less realistic than myomers,
but it does make more sense for its mecha than synthetic muscles does
for ANY mecha. Muscles can get tired, muscles can get ripped, and you
can't fix a muscle with a monkeywrench. As for the entire giant robot
concept, yes, it might be a little ridiculous too, but that's rather
like calling rock music awful because you can't stand one group.
3) I don't use a kill file, I use a threaded newsreader, and what dis-
appoints me is not the relatively large number of BattleTech posts,
but the relatively small number of any other posts. You say to post
my own, but I want to read posts by other people on topics that I wouldn't
even think of. And, incidentally, I WAS posting my own message, you
replied to it. :) :)
4) This is not meant to be a flame, even if it sounds like one.
Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex
weapon types: Fuel-Air Explosives. (:
][magine: Units in the target hex take 5-10 points of damage to
EVERY location, plus an automatic additional 20 heat. Units in the
surrounding hexes take 1/2 that. If the bomb doesn't kill the target,
the internal ammo explosions probably will....
--
_______________________________________________________
/ -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex (: /
/ lun...@netcom.com GEnie: LUNATIC CI$: 76170,672 /
/______________________________________________________/
Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex
>whole idea of the BattleTech system a little laughable.
_
(_
__)o do I. I _still_ have fun playing it, though. (:
>Here these people are, supposedly light-years ahead of us in tech-
>nology, yet they can't seem to make weapons that are up to present-
>day standards. Before you start flaming that BattleTech's techno-
>logical level has devolved from what it once was due to wars, consider
>that even in its prime, the Star League's weapons don't compare to
>what we have today. While I don't have the exact stats for BattleTech
>here, I believe that the longest-ranged missile there was had some-
>thing like a range of what, 10 boards? Whatever happened to ICBMs?
>What about even the 50-mile Phoenix missiles that modern-day fighters
>carry? I strongly suspect that one of our new F-23 ATFs could take
>on a BattleTech aerofighter of equivalent or slightly larger tonnage
>and win from miles away on dint of its missiles (whose tracking
>systems are also superior to BattleTech's, btw). The same goes for
>an M-1 Abrams tank. I have more faith in our high-tech modern-day
>army than any BattleTech lance there is.
\/\/ell, modern weapons vs. four little lead miniatures sure isn't
a fair fight.... Seriously, though, so the background is a little
ridiculous. It's not like there aren't any other games that are
worse. There is (was?) a whole column in every issue of Space Gamer
called "Murphy's Rules / Rules Murphy's" that existed solely to point
out the silliness (non-realism) of various rules in a number of games.
>Robotech...now THAT's another story... ;)
_
(_
__)ure is. Amazing how the can fit all the components of both a
high performance fighter aircraft, spacecraft, and giant walking
robot into one package, PLUS all the equipment needed to convert it
on the fly, in battle, from one to the other. (Yeah, BTech has 'em,
too. So they're BOTH guilty, along with Mekton, and... :)
>Of course, the weapons thing is just a minor bug, really. What I
>really don't like, I have to admit, are the rules. They're overly
>complicated, more suited to a strategy game like the ones with all
>the little cannons the bad guys play in the movies than to a RPG.
>It's just too bloody DRY for my tastes.
\/\/ell, BattleTech isn't supposed to be an RPG. That's what
MechWarrior is for. (: Actually, one of the design goals of BT
is that it does NOT require a GM, allowing it to be played by two
players on equal ground. I don't know of many RPGs that don't
require a GM/DM.
>Of course, the technology is somewhat hilarious in its own right.
>Synthetic muscle fibers? Give me a BREAK... :)
\_/
|ep, silly, aren't they? I don't really care, though. Like I
said, I just play the game. It doesn't matter to me whether the
mechs have synthetic muscle fibers moving their limbs or tribbles
shackled in harnesses with a little Battle Troll slavedriver cracking
a whip at their... er, bodies.
>Sorry, this really isn't meant to be a white hot fusion torch-type
>flame. I guess I'm just a little fed up with the game, and seeing
>so many more messages about IT than about my own favorite mecha games,
>Robotech and Mekton. I'll just go back to my corner now... :)
][t was known from the very start that BattleTech was going to
get the majority of traffic in this newsgroup. One of the reasons
I had for CREATING this group in the first place was to spark
interest in the other systems, such as RoboTech and Mekton. I
would hope that there are now more messages around here pertaining
to those systems than there were in rec.games.frp.misc, before (I
rarely visited rgfm, myself, so I'm not one to be able to tell).
Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex
>
>1) If the limited weapon ranges are there for "balance and playability,"
>how come Robotech has more relistic weapons ranges (in thousands of
>feet for cannons, and in miles for missiles) and is actually a more
>playable system than BattleTech? (note: playability is my own opinion)
|)attleTech has maps of a certain scale that require the limitations
on weapons ranges. If you really want to "fix" it, just change the
scale of the maps. (Multiplying everything by three helps. Even
better would be multiplying everything by twelve. Your miniatures
would have to be 1/12 the height to be accurate, though....)
>It is a point I am slightly willing to concede, however, because my
>current fave game, Mekton, does have limited weapon ranges much as
>does BattleTech. However, it is all that much more playable than
>BattleTech, and it openly admits it is stealing its concept from
>anime but doesn't directly copy any mecha, while BattleTech hardly
>mentions anime (if at all) and steals design after design..
___
|he majority of the people playing BattleTech don't watch anime.
It's true. Even mentioning it would probably confuse them. It doesn't
really matter, IMHO, as it's all just background. (Like I've said
before, I just play the game.) Make up your own background if the
one provided doesn't suit you.
>2) Mekton doesn't have myomers. Robotech doesn't have myomers; look
>at the illustrations in the Macross book under "mechanical engineer"
>OCC and you'll see a lot of complicated-looking hydraulic-electronic
>stuff. I will concede that Protoculture is less realistic than myomers,
>but it does make more sense for its mecha than synthetic muscles does
>for ANY mecha. Muscles can get tired, muscles can get ripped, and you
>can't fix a muscle with a monkeywrench. As for the entire giant robot
>concept, yes, it might be a little ridiculous too, but that's rather
>like calling rock music awful because you can't stand one group.
_
(_
__)o BattleTech is like the one group that plays rock music that
you don't like? (: That's fair, other people "listen to it." I
don't quite see the point of continually nitpicking on certain things.
Every system has its own flaws and ridiculous assumptions.
>3) I don't use a kill file, I use a threaded newsreader, and what dis-
>appoints me is not the relatively large number of BattleTech posts,
>but the relatively small number of any other posts. You say to post
>my own, but I want to read posts by other people on topics that I wouldn't
>even think of. And, incidentally, I WAS posting my own message, you
>replied to it. :) :)
_
/-\nd your message was a reply to another person's message, and
this message is a reply to your message, and.... This is good, I
think we have something, here. <grin> All part of communicating.
>4) This is not meant to be a flame, even if it sounds like one.
___
|hat's ok, we're pretty good about things like that, here (just
don't bring up using two hatchets at once in BT, or the Enterprise
vs. the SDF-1... :).
ael...@eagle.wesleyan.edu
> into my campaigns. Let me know what you think.
>
>
> Aerotech Rules Modifications
>
>
> RECORD SHEETS
>
> The original Aerotech Fighter record sheet will be used for all
> fighters.
>
> WEAPON RANGES
> The weapons carried by Aerospace fighters are listed as the same
> type as on Battlemechs. But one may notice that the distances on
> Aerotech maps and Battletech maps are not the same. For example, a
> Medium Laser has a range of 9 hexes. This turns out to be 270 meters
> on the Battletech map but increases to 4,590 meters on the Aerotech
> map. This has caused confusion among many players. But what many
> have not realized is that these weapons are used in space where there is
> no atmosphere. This will greatly enhance the ranges because ther is
> nothing to cause dispersion of beam weapons nor resistance to cannon
> shells or missles. The ranges stated are the maximum ranges at which
> the weapons are accurate and cause their indicated damage. But when
> the aircraft descends to low altitude, the weapons become as standard
> Battletech weapons. This means one must get low to be within range of
> any ground target. Also, dogfighting will be much closer (one Aerotech
> hex is 17 Battletech hexes, which equates to 510 meters.)
>
that the laser weapons benefit from the lower density of the air, and the
projectile weapons from the high speed at which aerospace fighters travel.
Also, as I remember, the size of each hex is different on the space, high-alt
and low-alt maps, which accounts for changes of range for the weapons.
> AIR-TO-AIR GUIDED MISSLES
> Some people may have wondered why aircraft in the 31st century
> don't carry some equivalent of the current AIM-9 Sidewinder or AIM-7
> Sparrow. Well now they do. The stats for the missles used today are
> taken from the Harpoon (tm GDW)modern naval wargame. They include the thrust
There are a lot of reasons. For one thing, modern air-to-air guided missiles
carry realtively little explosive compared to the ones in battletech, and
probably wouldn't dent the armor. Actualy, the original version of battletech
said that the technology was lost. Later, there was experimentation with
guided missiles in the war of 3039. There were anti-guidance defenses
installed in almost every mech immediately. In one of the modules that was
released last year, stats were given for heat seeking missiles, and the 3052
rules include streak SRM's. If you realy want to add guided missiles, toss
bombing and the like to your aerospace games (a bad idea in my opinion), you are probably better off just
converting btech weapons to a game designed specificaly for plane combat. That
way you won't have to ask other questions, like how come a btech aerospace
fighter can't pull an immelman.
Cluster munitions are also provided for in the return-of-the-clan rules. SO
are FASCAM rounds. I think you need to think about the types of weapons that
are actualy used in battletech and today. Modern a-a weapons are designed for
enemies with almost no armor. The majority of the missile is taken up by
guidance and fuel systems. Btech fighters are a lot more difficult to kill.
Also, one can assume that many weapons in btech are in fact guided in some way,
probably by the targeting systems on the mechs they were fired from, but that
most mechs carry very sophisticated anti-guidance systems. I think this is a
much more reasonable approach. Otherwise we would end up with a completely
different game.
-Amos Elberg
ael...@eagle.wesleyan.edu
SCALIEN Alexia shasti
>how come Robotech has more relistic weapons ranges (in thousands of
>feet for cannons, and in miles for missiles) and is actually a more
>playable system than BattleTech? (note: playability is my own opinion)
>It is a point I am slightly willing to concede, however, because my
>current fave game, Mekton, does have limited weapon ranges much as
>does BattleTech. However, it is all that much more playable than
>BattleTech, and it openly admits it is stealing its concept from
>anime but doesn't directly copy any mecha, while BattleTech hardly
>mentions anime (if at all) and steals design after design..
Robotechs more realisic ranges are because robotech is not played on a game
board of any kind. Battle tech or mekton are made ot be played on a game board
Ever try to play robotch on a map board? I have and it is a mess. The only
way that robotech can have the ranges it does is because the battles are
rolepayed with a GM saying "OK, the battle pod is only four miles out." and
the player respondes, "I'll fire two midium range missles at it."
If this same senario was done in btech with realist ranges it would be.
player moves mech, opponent six map boards (3 km just short of 2 miles) fires
missiles. After the insane number of hexes is counted then the shot is fired.
Now I will not get into a "roleplaying is better the war gaming" flame war.
I like both.
Agreed. Btech has a lame excuse for there ranges but mekton has a good one.
In the Mekton II rulebook on page 36 "Here we find giant robotic warriors
fighting with tank sized weapons--weapons with ranges of literally hundreds
of miles! To show such battles even using a tiny scale such as 300mm (the
traditional microarmor wargame scale) would require hex maps twenty or thirty
feet long! On top of this, a scale designer designer also has to deal lots
and lots of small humans running around underfoot. In order to ever see
these participants, one is required to contract the scale of operations
even smaller
, once again conflicting with the realistic ranges of modern missile and
beam weapons." The rest of the article says that a compromise had to be
made for
the game.>
>2) Mekton doesn't have myomers. Robotech doesn't have myomers; look
>at the illustrations in the Macross book under "mechanical engineer"
>OCC and you'll see a lot of complicated-looking hydraulic-electronic
>stuff. I will concede that Protoculture is less realistic than myomers,
>but it does make more sense for its mecha than synthetic muscles does
>for ANY mecha. Muscles can get tired, muscles can get ripped, and you
>can't fix a muscle with a monkeywrench. As for the entire giant robot
>concept, yes, it might be a little ridiculous too, but that's rather
>like calling rock music awful because you can't stand one group.
Myomers are a creation to get past the fact that hydrolics though powerful
and reliable, cannot mimic a fast accurate motion (like rolling a pencil
off your hand, etc.) This is a problem that robotics engineers are tackling.
One thing I have heard of is a metel used to mive robotic limbs is a metal
that contracts when heated. The result was a robotic hand capable of normal
movement, but, the metal had to cool for the hand of fingers to release so
each motion took several minutes.
Hydrilics are also easily worn down. Myomers may be able to mimic human motionb
but they do not suffer from exhaustion. The fusion reactor of a mech is more
than enough to power a myomer bundle for as long as a mech is running.
Also a fiber that contracts to an electrical current should be relativaly
maintaince free. Battle damage would have to be replaced of course but
if you fire a rocket at a hydraulic system it to will have to be replaced.
So myomers are very much an advantage over hydraulic systems. As for realism,
how unrealisic is a synthetic fiber that contracts to an electrical current?
Remember, that robotic hand I was talking about the metal tape would contract
to half tthe origional length.
>
>3) I don't use a kill file, I use a threaded newsreader, and what dis-
>appoints me is not the relatively large number of BattleTech posts,
>but the relatively small number of any other posts. You say to post
>my own, but I want to read posts by other people on topics that I wouldn't
>even think of. And, incidentally, I WAS posting my own message, you
>replied to it. :) :)
Well I have a whole slew of stuff to post for mekton, the only problem
is I can't get the documents from my word processor. I hate having to
retype stuff.
>
>4) This is not meant to be a flame, even if it sounds like one.
>
Same here, I am just responing to you, not flaming you.
>--
>Chris Meadows | Robotech/RIFTS/Palladium fanfic author/editor
>CHM173S@SMSVMA | They Might Be Giants about Star Trek aliens:
>CHM...@VMA.SMSU.EDU | "Everybody wants prosthetic foreheads
>CMEA...@NYX.CS.DU.EDU | on their real heads!"
SCALIEN
tsta...@metgem.gcn.uoknor.edu
Top Gun was the first game I ever played that simulated combat. I
purchased it when I was 16, almost immediately after it had come out and
after seeing the movie for the 10th time. At that time, the game seemed
to offer a good simulation of aerial combat. But when I went to college at
N.C. State (Go Wolfpack!! :-D ), I was introduced to another aerial combat
game, the name of which I cannot remember. This, combined with several
documentaries, reminded me of how complex the whole thing is. Top Gun seemed
inadequate to the task.
The main thing that bothers me about using Top Gun in BT (or AT) is
that it only allows a maximum, straight-line move of 6 for conventional
fighters. Sure there are many other maneuvers allowed that aerospace cannot
do, but some of that is taken into account in the Aerotech section of the
Compendium. There it lists maneuvers that both aerospace can use, and some that
only conventional aircraft can do. I did use some of the targeting rules from
Top Gun, especially the IR and SARH targeting rules. These are almost identical
to the ones in Top Gun, but I use the missle stats from Harpoon, which seems to
work pretty well.
I know it's going to be hard to actually implement some of the missles
into AT, so I simplify it sometimes by having only conventional fighters carry
missles, allowing only firing at targets on-board, and instantaneous flight-
time. Most of the time this limits the type of missle to either the AIM-9
or AIM-7 equivalent. I've had no complaints from my players so far, and it
does seem to help conventional fighters match up to aerospace.
BTW: To the person having problems with the "reality" of Battletech,
remember that it is only a *game* that many people *like* to play. Please
don't start a "my game is better than yours" argument. This is detrimental
to everyone involved and only wastes disk space on the net. I don't like
D&D, but I don't condemn my friends or anyone else who plays it. So cool
your "white hot torch", please. I would eventually like to learn about
Mekton or Robotech, but would find it hard to do so if everyone who plays it
is like yourself.
Brad Stanley
tsta...@metgem.gcn.uoknor.edu
or
br...@mesnet.mesonet.uoknor.edu
"I'm dispossessed. What's your excuse?"
"I hate VAX!!!"
Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex
>Myomers are a creation to get past the fact that hydrolics though powerful
>and reliable, cannot mimic a fast accurate motion (like rolling a pencil
>off your hand, etc.) This is a problem that robotics engineers are tackling.
>One thing I have heard of is a metel used to mive robotic limbs is a metal
>that contracts when heated. The result was a robotic hand capable of normal
>movement, but, the metal had to cool for the hand of fingers to release so
>each motion took several minutes.
>
>
>So myomers are very much an advantage over hydraulic systems. As for realism,
>how unrealisic is a synthetic fiber that contracts to an electrical current?
>Remember, that robotic hand I was talking about the metal tape would contract
>to half tthe origional length.
][t's called Nitinol. The name comes from "Nickel Tin alloy,"
which is what it is. I played with some of the stuff years ago
when Omni magazine had an article about it and mentioned a supplier
for samples. They also ran a contest to find the best uses for it,
though I never did enter my ideas (one was a key that changes shape
when you insert it into the lock and the lock applies a current to
it -- problem is that Nitinol is too soft to use for keys). It's
neat stuff. If you're lucky, you can find a science store that
carries a bird or butterfly that uses a Nitinol wire to flap its
wings. Can't actually fly, though, it acts much too slowly and
its power supply is far too heavy.
SCALIEN Alexia shasti
magazines looking for that name
SCALIEN
Andrew J Hasara
sell wires of this stuff, as well as instruction on how to use them, and
directions on how to build a six-legged walker.
They call this stuff Flexinol, and it come in lengths up to 5 meters long.
the really thin stuff can cycle about 45 times a minute in free air. It"s some interesting stuff to look into.
The stuff contracts about 5% - 8% of its length and can pull 3-5 times it's own
weight. Last I checked, Peizoelectric elements could contract 20-28%, but at
only 2-3times thier weight. Piezoelectric are not as heat influenced, though.
For those of you who are interested, here is the contact info:
Mondo-tronics, Inc.
524 San Anselmo Ave #107
San Anselmo, CA 94960
USA
Phone: 415-455-9330
Fax: 415-455-9333
Email: mo...@holonet.net
Michael Allen Waters
of it ridiculous, but the myomers aren't so farfetched as one
might think. If you ever take a cousre in composite material
mechanics, you learn that all sorts of materials with weird
properties can be manufactured, including stuff that expands
when cooled and twists in all sorts of ways that you wouldn't
think. It's not so unreasonable to say that a material can be
made that that responds to changes in the electrical current
that passes through it.
Second, Aerotech as a simulation of air-to-air combat
at ANY technology level is like calling Monopoly a simulation
of Real Estate investing. Now for orbital stuff it's not bad,
except that all that heat that they build up does just that,
build up. Without convection or mass transfer to carry away
the heat, the only way to get rid of it is through radiation,
and there just isn't enough surface area on an aerospace
fighter to even begin to disspate that much radiation. For
atmospheric situations, it doesn't even have altitude, for
goodness sake. And you want guided missiles? There isn't any
way to modify them to get anything approaching a semblance of
reality. What needs to be done is a completely new set of
rules. Of course, that's if you care about the realism in the
first place. For an air-to-air combat game, get anything, and
I mean anything, besides Aerotech. Except maybe Top Gun.
But for Battletech, just roll the dice to see who gets
air superiority (high roll wins), and give them so many strafing
attacks and bomb attacks that can make for the duration of the
game. It's simpler and just as realistic. If you really want
to have airbattles in the Btech universe, use the rules for
something like Flight Leader (Avalon Hill) and modify them as
you can for the aerospace fighters of Btech.
Mike
--
___________________________________________________________________
Duj tIvoqtaH!
'Always trust your instincts.'
Jesse Taylor
> First, as to the reality of Battletech- Okay, so most
>of it ridiculous, but the myomers aren't so farfetched as one
>might think. If you ever take a cousre in composite material
>mechanics, you learn that all sorts of materials with weird
>properties can be manufactured, including stuff that expands
>when cooled and twists in all sorts of ways that you wouldn't
>think. It's not so unreasonable to say that a material can be
>made that that responds to changes in the electrical current
>that passes through it.
think... that there was some material they had that would contract if
exposed to light. I _suppose_ you could use that for Mecha right now...
But repairs would be a real pain... "Damn! I can't see a thing in here!!
Let me turn on this flashlight..." >CLICK< ('Mech starts spazzing out)
Not to mention what would happen if you had an armor breach during
the day... (scene of 'mech having a seizure) (scene of 'mech having a
seizure in the middle of an infantry/armor unit - tossing tanks and
armored vehicles flying everywhere).
>Mike
JT
--
The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
internet: laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Andrei Cogan
The University of Indiana had a project involving the use of nitinol
to make a little sitck-figure ant that moved by the use of nitinol wires.
The name they gave for it was "Stiquito," and one of the interesting things
about it was that you can build one yourself for maybe $15 or so total costs
(the main cost is the Nitinol wire itself, which is rather expensive).
Info on how you can get the plans for making one are on soda in
/pub/btech/misc/nitinol, or you can ftp them yourself from cs.indiana.edu in
/pub/techreports/TR363a*
-Andrei Cogan (coga...@soda.berkeley.edu)
Tai-i Pendo Matsuura of Ryuken-san
maintainer of the BTECH ftp site
Andrei Cogan (coga...@soda.berkeley.edu) ||| When in doubt, panic.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you think it will take, |
| even if you take into account Hofstadter's Law. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| "Be kind to your brain cells, I say" - Joe B. |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Jarrod A. Lemire
control lamps beneath the carapace allow the soldier to move while encased in nearly 500lbs of armor. More than just move, the enarmored troops carry 300lbs of equipment while dashing at a sprinter's pace." Given a couple of hundred years before the Mackie comes out, I'm sure this technology could be developed sufficiently to allow it to move a 12 meter tall battlemech instead of a two meter tall suit of powered armor. Clearly if this kind of thing can be done by light, myomers that contract under elec
trical current aren't that implausable. What actually does seem unlikely is that mechanical systems would be considered for the task of moving a battlemech around the field.
-Jarrod
Isaac Kuo
Then congratulations, you have a bona fide myomer on you wrist! Materials
that contract/expand when electricity flows through them exist today, are
commonplace and inexpensive, and are called piezoelectrics. Of the 32 types
of crystal structure, 20 exhibit piezoelectric properties. The most commonly
used today are quartz and ceramic oxides, both much less expensive than
Nitinol.
When an electric current is put through a piezoelectric, it contracts or
expands in one direction by a small amount with a lot of force. The converse
also occurs, making them more useful for detecting forces than detecting
expansion/contraction. The useful point is that these materials do the
conversion between forces and voltages faster than anything else, so they are
useful for:
a) Accurate timing. Quartz has a stable resonant frequency so it is used for
cheap and accurate timing.
b) Ultrasonic sonar and welding. Very few actuators can react fast enough to
produce high frequencies, especially with the force necessary for an
ultrasound drill or welder. Piezoelectrics can.
Unfortunately, changing small motions with high force into large motions with
smaller force is not so easy. The current method is to sandwich two
piezoelectrics with opposite properties around an incompressible insulator.
When current is applied, one side expands while the other contracts. The
result is a noticeable bend. It is possible that some arrangment related to
this will give your mecha just the myomer you need.
One thing, though. Piezoelectrics are really efficient and wouldn't produce
much heat. I suppose you could put electric heaters in parallel with them...
--
*Isaac Kuo (isaa...@math.berkeley.edu) * _______
*"There are somethings you have to do even if you ARE * ______(___o___)______
* an enlightened liberal cop who knows all about *(==(_______________)==)
* sensitivity and everything." --Shooty, Hitchhiker * \==\/ \/==/
steven david miller
>You want myomers? Look at your wristwatch. Does it say "Quartz" on it?
>Then congratulations, you have a bona fide myomer on you wrist! Materials
>that contract/expand when electricity flows through them exist today, are
>commonplace and inexpensive, and are called piezoelectrics. Of the 32 types
>of crystal structure, 20 exhibit piezoelectric properties. The most commonly
>used today are quartz and ceramic oxides, both much less expensive than
>Nitinol.
You forgot to mention my favorite piezoelectric product: the
piezoelectric lighter. Try taking the crystal case out and put you
fingers on the two metal plates and squeeze the crystal with your
other hand; you'll get a most definate example of piezoelectrics. :)
Also, I read somewhere that scientist are trying to make robots the
size of computer chips that use piezoelectrics to move their legs and
"pinchers". They want to use them to remove radioactive particles and
stuff from nuclear power plant pipes, etc.
FYI, StevMiller (smi...@cis.ohio-state.edu)
Daniel Hanish
cmea...@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
> >
> >Your supplement is an interesting idea. I, however, do find the
> >whole idea of the BattleTech system a little laughable.
>
economics and doing calculus. The stranger the situation, the more room
for imagination.
> >Here these people are, supposedly light-years ahead of us in tech-
> >nology, yet they can't seem to make weapons that are up to present-
> >day standards.
ranges by 4 or something to make it realistic. But then, all the fun
would be lost. If one assault Mech with LRMs can immobilize or kill a
dozen light Mechs before they can get into their ranges, then games lose
their excitement. Also, terrain would have less effect on a game. Just
stand on a hill.
Your point about the missiles and M-1 tanks is incorrect. It's true
that the ATF could fire its missiles, and they'd probably hit. The
difference is that the AeroFighter wouldn't die. We've all been over the
discussion about how an M-1 has an AC/5 or AC/10, and how much armor an
M-1 would have. The difference is that the M-1 would have to hit a Mech
10 times in the same location to even lightly damage it.
> >Robotech...now THAT's another story... ;)
> _
> (_
> __)ure is. Amazing how the can fit all the components of both a
> high performance fighter aircraft, spacecraft, and giant walking
> robot into one package, PLUS all the equipment needed to convert it
> on the fly, in battle, from one to the other. (Yeah, BTech has 'em,
> too. So they're BOTH guilty, along with Mekton, and... :)
>
survive WITHOUT SERIOUS ATTRITION against hundreds of thousands of enemy
ships?
> >Of course, the technology is somewhat hilarious in its own right.
> >Synthetic muscle fibers? Give me a BREAK... :)
>
> \_/
> |ep, silly, aren't they? I don't really care, though. Like I
> said, I just play the game. It doesn't matter to me whether the
> mechs have synthetic muscle fibers moving their limbs or tribbles
> shackled in harnesses with a little Battle Troll slavedriver cracking
> a whip at their... er, bodies.
>
food supply, and pretty soon the Enemy Mechs are buried in fuzzy balls!
But you're exactly right- it's just a game.
> >Sorry, this really isn't meant to be a white hot fusion torch-type
> >flame.
Hate to disappoint you, but that's how it sounds from down here.
Sgt. Hanish, AFFC
Back in the land of silly robots after Spring Break
Robert Everett Brunskill
cmea...@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
>
>Your supplement is an interesting idea. I, however, do find the
>whole idea of the BattleTech system a little laughable.
HOW CAN YOU SAY THIS?!?!?!?!?! I BET YOU'D FIND RUNNING OVER SMALL
ANIMALS WITH A LARGE MOTORCYCLE LAUGHABLE AS WELL! BATTLETECH IS
PERFECT AND NO ONE SHOULD EVER CONSIDER PLAYING OR EVEN _DOING_ ANYTHING
OTHER THAN PLAY IT! YOU SHOULD SEND FASA LOTS OF MONEY RIGHT NOW AND
GET DOWN ON YOUR HANDS AND KNEES AND KISS THEIR FOOT ACTUATORS FOR
LETTING YOU BUY THEIR GAME! NOTHING IS SILLY ABOUT BATTLETECH! I BET
YOU LIKE ROBOTECH OR SOME PANSY UNAMERICAN GAME LIKE THAT!
>Here these people are, supposedly light-years ahead of us in tech-
>nology, yet they can't seem to make weapons that are up to present-
>day standards.
READ THE BACKGROUND, DUH! IT'S FULLY EXPLAINED THAT THE INNER SPHERE
HAS BEEN AT WAR SO LONG THAT THE TECHNOLOGY LEVEL AIN'T WHAT IT USED TO
BE! BUT I'M SURE THEY STILL HAVE COMPUTER NETWORKS WHERE MINDLESS DORKS
LIKE YOU CAN WRITE STUPID, MEANINGLESS POSTS ABOUT HOW STUPID THE WEAPON
RANGES ARE!
>Robotech...now THAT's another story... ;)
WHAT DID I SAY! ROBOTECH IS STUPID SICK AND DIGUSTING! FIRST OF ALL IT
WAS DONE BY THE JAPANESE! THEY'RE NOT AMERICAN AND THEY COULDN'T WRITE
A GOOD STORY TO SAVE THEIR LIFE! ROBOTECH DIDN'T EVEN MAKE ANY SENSE!
I STOPPED WATCHING IT AFTER THE FIRST FIVE MINUTES! PALLADIUM IS JUST A
FRONT COMPANY USED TO PUBLISH JAPANESE PROPOGANDA! THEY'RE TRYING TO
DRIVE GOOD AMERICAN COMPANIES LIKE FASA OUT OF BUSINESS! I MEAN LOOK AT
THE LAM AND THE VERITRASHES, AS WELL AS THE OTHER ROBOTRASH MECHS! THEY
CLEARLY STOLE THOSE DESIGNS FROM FASA, COPYRIGHTED IT BEFORE THEM, THEN
SUED THE HELL OUT OF THEM! I'VE EVEN HEARD THAT THE JAPANESE ARE MAKING
A FULLY DERIVATIVE WORK OF BATTLETECH AND HAVE PLANS ON EVENTUALLY
TRYING TO SELL IT HERE! THEY DON'T EVEN BOTHER TO CHANGE THE MECH
NAMES! AND ANY GROWN ADULT THAT STILL WATCHES ANIMATION SHOULD BE
ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES! TAKE YOUR PRE-PUBECENT FANTASIES AND POSTS AND
GET OFF THIS BOARD!
BATTLETECH IS A FULLY AMERICAN GAME, UNLIKE ROBOTECH AND MEKTON WHICH
ARE DERIVED FROM AND FULLY FUNDED BY THE JAPANESE! OH YEAH, AND MECHA!!
WHICH IS FULLY FUNDED BY THOSE MEXICAN AND CUBAN COMMUNISTS!
>Of course, the technology is somewhat hilarious in its own right.
>Synthetic muscle fibers? Give me a BREAK... :)
I THINK YOUR BRAIN IS A STRONG CASE SUPPORTING SYNTHETIC MUSCLES! I'M
SURE THE US MILITARY ALREADY HAS THOSE TODAY, THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO
KEEP IT SECRET SO THAT THE JAPANESE AND COMMUNISTS DON'T STEAL IT.
>Next the mechs will have synthetic muscle fibers moving their limbs or
>tribbles shackled in harnesses with a little Battle Troll slavedriver
>cracking a whip at their... er, bodies.
>
YOU'D LIKE THAT WOULDN'T YOU YOU SICK PIECE OF SACK CLOTH?!?!?!?!? I
BET YOU DREAM ABOUT FONDLING TRIBBLES WHILE YOU WATCH THAT PANSY STAR
TREK OF YOURS! I'LL HAVE YOU KNOW THAT HALF THE PEOPLE WHO WORKED FOR
THAT SHOW WERE ILLEGAL ALIENS AND WERE TAKING JOBS AWAY FROM US
FULL-BLOODED AMERICANS. WHY ANYONE WOULD EVEN WANT TO WORK FOR THAT
SHOW, OR WHY IT IS STILL BEING MADE TODAY IS BEYOND ME!
>Sorry, this really isn't meant to be a white hot fusion torch-type
>flame.
SURE YOU PANSY ANTI-BATTLETECH PEOPLE ALWAYS TRY TO CHICKEN OUT AFTER
SPEWING YOUR PROPOGANDA! FIRST YOU TRY TO CLAIM THAT BATTLETECH IS AS
DERIVATIVE A WORK AS ROBOTECH, AND THEN YOU CAN'T EVEN BACK IT UP! THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE SEE THROUGH YOUR PLOY AND WE DON'T LIKE IT!
AMERICA, LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT BUDDY!
I WANT TO SHOUT THE FUNNY WORDS!
I LIKE YOU!
AND I LIKE YOU!
I LIKE IT!
IT IS A PRETTY PICTURE!
Oh
Robert Everett Brunskill
probably get me into a lot of trouble. I tried to follow the inter-net
guide to power posting as much as I could, but I didn't have it on hand
so here is what I forgot:
YOU PROBABLY DON'T REALLY EXIST ANYWAY. THIS WAS PROBABLY JUST SOME
PROPAGANDA FILE THAT THE JAPANESE POST TO TRY TO TRICK US. I THINK YOUR
MOTHER WOULD BE GLAD TO HEAR THAT.
Rob Brunskill
--hand sig---
"What's the fun in always playing it safe? What's the harm in doing
something you're just not sure of? Sometimes you just have to try
tackling a tree.
-my RA, after going tree-hugging with his face at
"Then there are over one hundred million idiots out there and only 12%
are non-idiots."
-Unnamed net-person
j...@pembvax1.pembroke.edu
> In article <1993Mar25.0...@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
> cmea...@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
>>
Ohh, no lets not start this debate over again. I find it sad that some
people find that they have to slam other gaming systems, because of its
origin, storyline...etc. I have not played Robotech or any of the other
Japanese Animation based games, but I have watched Robotech when I was
younger. This got me interested in the Btech when it came out. (I got the
1st edition in 85 and still play it). I think I can say that everyone agrees
that your type of postings are not appricated here. If you wish to air your
fustrastions, do it on alt.bitch.moan.complain, leave the bandwidth for
someone that has something intersting to say
Halon system activated,
jts
AKA
Spectre
tai, Luthien Academy Cadre
[btech muse: 3026]
pcs$...@altair.selu.edu
way to go Spectre!
I must agree with you on this, because though I don't personally like ANY
game-systems, I still play them. Why? Because it's FUN. I don't
care if Breeati COULD slam-dunk a Locust. I don't care if Minmei could
Pilot a Dropship. I just want to play a fun game! I've had my fun with RT,
we usually DON'T plat RT with a map. I've had my fun with BT, MAP is a
necessity. I enjoy playing MW, running around with a toolbox. Do I say anything
about Mechaton or any other systems? I'd like to try them, But I don't know
them. Personally, I prefer simulations, The activision mechwarrior game
Wing commander, and other sims. I prefer them to everything else.
The reason I play anything else? It's fun to be able to do something on my own,
with a few friends, something that isn't computer set up. I LIKE being able to
design my own charcters, not play something that has been set up for me.
So my char stinks, That's half the fun!
Sasha Katsuichi. Tai-i NightStalkers (3026)
LIN MONTEIL
>YOU'D LIKE THAT WOULDN'T YOU YOU SICK PIECE OF SACK CLOTH?!?!?!?!? I
>BET YOU DREAM ABOUT FONDLING TRIBBLES WHILE YOU WATCH THAT PANSY STAR
>TREK OF YOURS! I'LL HAVE YOU KNOW THAT HALF THE PEOPLE WHO WORKED FOR
>THAT SHOW WERE ILLEGAL ALIENS AND WERE TAKING JOBS AWAY FROM US
>FULL-BLOODED AMERICANS. WHY ANYONE WOULD EVEN WANT TO WORK FOR THAT
>SHOW, OR WHY IT IS STILL BEING MADE TODAY IS BEYOND ME!
I suggest you chill out pal. While I dearly love to give you an earful
frankly I think I'll be wasting my time. Besides I'm sure others will rise to
your challenge.
Consider this a warning
Eiji
Michael Allen Waters
And I don't mean it as an enigmatic story, either.
Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex
you MEANT that! Ooops, too late....
][T WAS OBVIOUSLY A JOKE, PEOPLE! Well, ok, maybe not so obvious
to some. I've already read five responses to it that thought it was
real.
(Robert, you should have waited a couple more days, until April Fool's
Day. :)
Ivan the Terrible...or Jay
stuff that I dare not re-pollute the net with......
All I can say in reply is:
You idiot.. please stop wasting bandwith.
thanks
Jay/Ivan/Pechorin
PS: Did I mention that BT3056 still needs builders? :)
Opera Man
>>THAT SHOW WERE ILLEGAL ALIENS AND WERE TAKING JOBS AWAY FROM US
>>FULL-BLOODED AMERICANS. WHY ANYONE WOULD EVEN WANT TO WORK FOR THAT
>>SHOW, OR WHY IT IS STILL BEING MADE TODAY IS BEYOND ME!
>
>I suggest you chill out pal. While I dearly love to give you an earful
>
>Consider this a warning
>Eiji
Look, give the guy a break, he's obviously enjoying himself, and just
poking fun...
It's a free country, (in a manner of speaking)
and I rather enjoyed reading his post.
So, before you get all hot and bothered about a rather loud post, sit
back and laugh, because its all just fun and games, right?
Thanks
Sgt. Cable
LIN MONTEIL
>
>Look, give the guy a break, he's obviously enjoying himself, and just
>poking fun...
>It's a free country, (in a manner of speaking)
>and I rather enjoyed reading his post.
>
>So, before you get all hot and bothered about a rather loud post, sit
>back and laugh, because its all just fun and games, right?
>
No! YOU take a break! Call it a joke all you want but I don't think it
is particularly funny to give racist remarks on an international net and then
tell everyone to chill out because they can't get the joke!
If you did meant this as a joke then you have a particularly eccentric sense of
humour. What exactly was the purpose of your 'joke'? so you can catch all the
guys that doesn't get it and make them feel stupid?!?
It may seem "obvious" to you but there are actually people out there who
believe this type of B.S, and it's not an unreasonable assumption that one or
two might have infiltrated the net.
Besides.. if you noticed I didn't flame him, just gave him a friendly advice
to stop this kind of B.S.
Eiji
Robert Everett Brunskill
have included that and a big smiley at the end of the post, but alas, it
was not to be.
I have a PowerBook, and the 'enter' key that sends the messages is right
next to the spacebar, and, well, I think you get the picture...
I intended the post as a joke, and was hoping that you'd realise that by
how ridiculous it is (note that I even misquoted, I was suprised no one
attacked that). Even though I still intended a disclaimer and such at
the end, but it wasn't there by accident.
Yes, I play BattleTech, Robotech (suprise!), SF3D (Japanese game), watch
anime, collect manga, and want to try Mecha and Mekton some time.
So scroll back, read the post again, and have a good chuckle/laugh, or
get angry again.
HAVE FUN DAMMIT!
Rob Brunskill
Should I say it? Oh heck, why not...
Buckaroo 3026
Phelan_Ward/Arcadia_World 3056
(Personally I thought the attempt at a Ren and Stimpy quote at the end
would give it away (see 'Mad Dog Hoek' sometime))
Mark Stock
Terrible...or Jay, pech...@next05cville.wam.umd.edu writes:
>Robert Everett Brunskill <rb6t+@andre bedehbedehbedeh...
>
>You idiot.. please stop wasting bandwith.
>thanks
Yes, it was a waste of bandwidth, but his point was put across just
as he wanted it (to most of us). He's sick of Mygame/Yourgame.
Hey, if you want to crack down on bandwidth, what say you and I go
ax murder anyone who replies with quotes longer than the Dead Sea
scrolls...and has the audacity to re-post the original author's
page-long signature file!!! YEAH!
Mark J.Stock
mst...@engin.umich.edu
University of Michigan, Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering
"I am the Occam's Razor, I am the Steppenwolf"
TwentyNothing
tsta...@metgem.gcn.uoknor.edu
If I knew a flame war was going to erupt due to my post I would have dug out
my asbestos unmentionables! :-)
Brad
Paul Williams[SysOp]
> The University of Indiana had a project involving the use of nitinol
> to make a little sitck-figure ant that moved by the use of nitinol wires.
> The name they gave for it was "Stiquito," and one of the interesting things
> about it was that you can build one yourself for maybe $15 or so total costs
> (the main cost is the Nitinol wire itself, which is rather expensive).
> Info on how you can get the plans for making one are on soda in
> /pub/btech/misc/nitinol, or you can ftp them yourself from cs.indiana.edu in
> /pub/techreports/TR363a*
All this talk of nitinol brings up something I read/saw many moons
ago, some sort of white, pasty semi-liquid that solidified when
current was applied, for as long as current was applied. I seem to
remember them designing some sort of hydraulic press with the stuff,
but it eludes me.
Ideas?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
tha...@runic.via.mind.org (Paul Williams [SysOp]) | PGP 2.0 Key avail
...!emory!uumind!runic!thantos | upon request.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mecha: It is said that these metal giants were shaped like men, so the
alien servants of evil would know it was Man who defeated them.
Michael Allen Waters
air/space interaction with Battletech. I was just saying it is
not anything close to a simulation of air-to-air combat. As
for space combat, it would make sense if there was a tonnae
requirement for expendable collant fluid or something. If
the extra tonnage messes things up with the rest of the game,
it would still make sense to allocate so many collant points per
heat sink, say, which are used up like fuel. That way a ship
could only fire so many times before it ran out of coolant and
started to overheat. In fact, it would tie-in well with the
coolant units introduced in Solaris VII - an apaptation of
aerotech to battlemech technology.
Speaking of fuel, aerospace fighters in atmosphere, due
to the extremely high temperatures that the engines operate at,
should use trivial amounts of fuel as opposed to the amount
they use in space. The temperatures are so hot that they could
use simple ramjets that operate off of only onces of fuel,
effectively giving aerospace fighters unlimited range within an
atmosphere. Otherwise, it make more game sense for an aerospace
fighter to go into orbit, rather than fly a few hundred
kilometers in the atmosphere. The first case would require
only a few fuel points. The second case would more than use up
all of most aerospace fighters fuel.
Chris Meadows
Not only is this person wrong about most of what he says, and not only
did he misquote me (that part about the tribbles is not mine), but his
message is completely paranoid and incoherent. I think someone's been
leaving his terminal logged in again.
--
Chris Meadows | Robotech/RIFTS/Palladium fanfic author/editor
CHM173S@SMSVMA | They Might Be Giants about Star Trek aliens:
CHM...@VMA.SMSU.EDU | "Everybody wants prosthetic foreheads
CMEA...@NYX.CS.DU.EDU | on their real heads!"
Gregory Newton
> Your point about the missiles and M-1 tanks is incorrect. It's true
>that the ATF could fire its missiles, and they'd probably hit. The
>difference is that the AeroFighter wouldn't die. We've all been over the
>discussion about how an M-1 has an AC/5 or AC/10, and how much armor an
>M-1 would have. The difference is that the M-1 would have to hit a Mech
>10 times in the same location to even lightly damage it.
A couple of points here from someone who has not read this
thread. I assume this is refering to a M1 tank. Now If you work it out
you will find that missiles in B'Tech wiegh 8.3 and 11.1 kg each (I think
these are the right numbers) Now if these can damage a mech with one of
these 120mm tank cannon HVAPDS shells will chew a mech baaaaaad.
Also if you compare some modern automatic cannons with b'tech
ones you will find they can get thru more wight of ammo in the same
period of time. (one of my friends worked out the a gua-8a could
get thru more ammo than an AC -20). Now this is not allowing for the fact
that b'tech ammo also includes storage racks, transport,etc etc. this
still means that mod weap. are likely to deliver as much wieght of shells
do a target (at a far higher velocity if you consider the poor ranges
of the b'tech weapons).
Point 2.
A M1 tank probably has 19 tonnes or more of armour. This is chobam
(sp?) which empiracally is tougher than titanium steel. This armour is
wrapped quite well round the tank and does not have to be wrapped around
limbs and over a badly shapped torso. The armour is also much better shaped
than the perpendicular faces most mechs have. A modern tank cannon is
capable of going thru this ...
If you were going to start comparing B'Tech with Reality
most of the mechs would for all their tech get wiped quick smart by
late 20c military vehicles...
... fortunately this is not what b'tech is for.
B'Tech is a simple game with shaky, unclear and highly unrealistic rules
that is good fun to play (especially when drunk). Dont take it seriously -
play it!!! (just pretend reality doesn't exist - sorry i forgot - that's
a prerequistite for gaming)
Have Fun - Greg 'Cloud' Newton
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Greg 'Cloud' Newton email: gr...@coombs.anu.edu.au
Opinions only mine No quote No joke No ideas
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Richard William Pikul
>Subject: BT is just silly (Was: Re: Aerotech Rules Additions)
>Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 02:38:51 GMT
>In article <1993Mar25.0...@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> cmea...@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows) writes:
>>
>>Your supplement is an interesting idea. I, however, do find the
>>whole idea of the BattleTech system a little laughable.
>
> (_
> __)o do I. I _still_ have fun playing it, though. (:
>
>
>>Here these people are, supposedly light-years ahead of us in tech-
>>nology, yet they can't seem to make weapons that are up to present-
>>logical level has devolved from what it once was due to wars, consider
>>that even in its prime, the Star League's weapons don't compare to
>>what we have today. While I don't have the exact stats for BattleTech
>>here, I believe that the longest-ranged missile there was had some-
>>thing like a range of what, 10 boards? Whatever happened to ICBMs?
>>What about even the 50-mile Phoenix missiles that modern-day fighters
>>carry? I strongly suspect that one of our new F-23 ATFs could take
>>on a BattleTech aerofighter of equivalent or slightly larger tonnage
>>and win from miles away on dint of its missiles (whose tracking
>>systems are also superior to BattleTech's, btw). The same goes for
>>an M-1 Abrams tank. I have more faith in our high-tech modern-day
>>army than any BattleTech lance there is.
>
Just a few corrections, first there are no ICBMs as an ICBM is only
useful for delivering a NBC (Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical) payload,
which are not being used and are effectavely(sp) banned. A phoenix has a
flight range of 80 to 90 nautical miles and has done a closing intercept at
110.
And as for the F-23, first there are only the two prototypes as the
F-22 is being built, anyhow an AS fighter of that aproximate mass is usually
10/15 or 11/17, this corresponds to a speed of mach 2 without afterburners,
and this is ground hugging! Thus a light AS fighter could defeat a F-22, by
outrunning the missles and then closing to use lasers which can track and
will kill on almost any hit.
I do admit that the ranges in BT are too short, but that is to make
the game both playable and fun, stopping it from being a long rangd shootout
that takes up your entire basement, ('See, you can't hit me, while you do
have LOS through the doorway, the entertainment center is still in the way.')
The Phoenix
Prabal Nandy
While we're on this topic... I recall seeing on CNN several years ago,
something about these kind of ceramic fibre bundles that expanded and
contracted with contact with acidic and basic solutions respectively. They
fibres had been fashioned into a sort of primitive arm muscle, and they were
squirting acid and base out of a bottle onto it for a demonstration... it
moved relatively fast... I know it's not mynomer, but who says mechs HAVE to
be made of metal anyway? I'll put down my bet that if mechs are ever built,
they'll be surprisingly small and light, and will be made out of ceramic
composites with the minimum of metal.
--
/| ________________ |pr...@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu| Lord of the Flies
O|===|* >________________> |pr...@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu| 1st MPC Division
\| | na...@scivax.stsci.edu | Colony Mechworks
Velox - Durus - Infestus | na...@fos.stsci.edu | Colony World Myops
JXS...@psuvm.psu.edu
>useful for delivering a NBC (Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical) payload,
>which are not being used and are effectavely(sp) banned. A phoenix has a
>flight range of 80 to 90 nautical miles and has done a closing intercept at
>110.
> And as for the F-23, first there are only the two prototypes as the
>F-22 is being built, anyhow an AS fighter of that aproximate mass is usually
>10/15 or 11/17, this corresponds to a speed of mach 2 without afterburners,
>and this is ground hugging! Thus a light AS fighter could defeat a F-22, by
>outrunning the missles and then closing to use lasers which can track and
>will kill on almost any hit.
> I do admit that the ranges in BT are too short, but that is to make
>the game both playable and fun, stopping it from being a long rangd shootout
>that takes up your entire basement, ('See, you can't hit me, while you do
>have LOS through the doorway, the entertainment center is still in the way.')
> The Phoenix
Exactly, BattleTech is just a game and us 'Techies' are playing it not
for comparison to today's weapons, but for fun. You can't compare a FASA game
to modern war machines. Anyway, every mech is stated to have "...the power of
a 20-21st century platton of tanks". If you don't like the game, don't compare
it to realism.
Thanks Phoenix!
Dragon Slayer |-)
My Fav I.S. Combo:
50 tons, full armor, 4/6/4, ER Large in each arm, SRM6
and an LRM 10 Thunder.
Robert Everett Brunskill
public oppology to all those I may have offended.
It will never happen again. Even I found myself distressed over the
post and its results. Some of you expressed concern over the language
used. I agree that it was extremely out-moded and warped (although I
did refrain from using truly obscene words).
I also agree that there are people out there who actually believe that
sort of thing, and it is distressing. Yes, I have even met a few.
I am distressed most of all over that fact that a flame war could start.
Please realise that over the next month there will be people reading
this board for the first time who will come across the original post
before reading further and will reply. Please do not be distressed by
this, and please try to keep from replying to them on the board, and
personally. I will take the resposibility of replying personally to
every reply that the original post attracts to let them know of the
error.
I am deeply sorry for any anxiety or problems this may have caused for
you, and I thank you for your patience.
Robert Everett Brunskill
April 3, 1993
Paul Stockley
[ A rascist monologue which has been deleted due to the total contempt in
which I hold it.]
Greetings (tm),
About the only thing that you have managed to do by writing
that article of yours is publicly humiliate and alianate yourself from many
people throughout the world. However, this is what you obviously chose to do,
so enjoy your infamity while it lasts. BTW You now are the only person that
I now include in my heretofore uncreated kill file. Goodbye Robert, forever.
ACE
s90...@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au
" How deep is the ocean ? " - Eric
" No Silicon Heaven ? But where would all the calculators go ? " - Kryten
" Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast." - Hero Rimmer
Engineering : The art of using something without actually understanding it.
" Well, Kryten. Now's the time for you to pull that top secret plan out of
your sleeve that's going to save us,"-Lister- ... " Sorry, sir. No secret
plan ... no sleeves."-Kryten
Bruce Maynard
Much agreed. It's morons like that who give the p[lace a bad rep...
Paul Overend
obviously so if you'd read even the first PARAGRAPH let alone page) get a
sense of humor and FAST! As to coming down on him for the "racist content" you
must have been looking at a different article than me. I only saw him
mention ILLEGAL ALIENS. No mention of race there.
Paul G. Overend
Tired, pissed off, lacking coffee and haven't had a good game in three
days.
LIN MONTEIL
>Will all the people that are taking offence at this guys joke (which was
>obviously so if you'd read even the first PARAGRAPH let alone page) get a
>sense of humor and FAST! As to coming down on him for the "racist content" you
I don't think it was very funny.
>must have been looking at a different article than me. I only saw him
>mention ILLEGAL ALIENS. No mention of race there.
In that case either you're blind or you didn't read the whole thing..
Eiji