Author Topic: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2 (Read 3942 times)

pyrotech · « **Reply #20 on:** May 05, 2014, 05:38:15 PM »

Well I completed my first design of a psudo-mech in AA.

My assumptions were:
1) tons = tons. I still need to play with your idea of tweaking this.
2) it is fine to throw out the totally busted ranges of CBT
3) standard military hull material for CBT is CAT24
4) armor belts * 4 = % of maximum armor the CBT mech carries (so 20-100% max armor capacity in increments of 20)
5) 30 days of fuel
6) Weapon Mk# = CBT damage value
7) Arm weapons are Flexible mounts, torso weapons are fixed mounts
8 ) MIRC represents all the robot parts and controls outside of the walker drive and weapon mounts

Equipment     Rating   Volume   Cost
Mass     100.0
Volume     01.0     300.0
Hull     55000.0   06.0     55000.0
CAT     24.0     21.0     24.0
Armor Belt     20.0        400.0
DB     20.0
Hit Points     120.0
Walker Drive     02.0     62.0     11000.0
Movement Points    04.0
Jumper Drive     00.0     00.0     00.0
Movement Points   00.0
Projectile Cannons     91.2     30510.0
Energy Cannons        36.0     16500.0
Missile Launchers        00.0     00.0
HUD           00.0
Payload Pallets        00.0     00.0
Microfrequency Rig    06.0     05.6     600.0
Tight Beam Rig     04.0     24.0     80000.0
Sensors     02.0     12.0     4000.0
Electronic Warfare    02.0     06.0     6000.0
Screen Generator    00.0     00.0     00.0
Fusion Reactor     12.0     12.0     50012.0
Fuel Storage     03.0     00.4     150.0
Control Points     04.5
Crew     01.0
Main Computer     34.0   0 3.4     34000.0
Control Area        05.0     5000.0
MIRC System     YES     13.0     11000.0
Crew Quarter     NO     00.0     00.0
Life Support     YES     10.0     500.0
Recreational Facility    NO     00.0     00.0
Dispensary     NO     00.0     00.0
Sick Bay     NO     00.0     00.0
Security Station     NO     00.0     00.0
Streamlining     NO     00.0
Radiation Shielding    YES     3000.0
Auxiliary Systems        12.5     11000.0
Remainder to cargo        00.9     04.5
Total        100.0     318676.5
Armament   Mark #   Mark Cat.   # Cannon   Mount Type   Mount Cat.   HUD   HUD Cost   Volume   Cost
MLA   15.0   02.0   01.0   Flexible   02.0      00.0   60.0   18500.0
AC   01.0   01.0   01.0   Flexible   02.0      00.0   02.0   11000.0
Blaster   09.0   01.0   01.0   Flexible   02.0      00.0   36.0   16500.0

Magazine #1   16.0                     24.0   830.0
Magazine #2   26.0                     05.2   180.0

Unfortunately I've run out of time to format this pretty. So that will have to wait till later.

I still need to work more on heat sinks, and missiles. Then I am going to try my hand at a 10 tonner and see how my assumptions hold on the small side.

Let me know what you think. Oh and credit to Maurice, I used his spreadsheet to put this together (although I have been fixing some minor bugs in it as I go).

pyrotech · « **Reply #21 on:** May 06, 2014, 02:51:53 PM »

Well I've tried the 10 ton mech.

Nothing to post because without bending and/or breaking several rules in AA, you can't build a Walker with MIRC and 1 crewmember with a mass of less than around 35 or so tons. The walker drive alone requires at least a 20 ton vehicle.

Faced with either patching multiple aspects of the system, or just trying the CBT tons * 10 = AA tons - the later is looking like a better solution all the time.

I am a little concerned that you may be able to fit too much on a 1000 Tons(AA) mech however. So that is my next experiment.

pyrotech · « **Reply #22 on:** May 06, 2014, 05:41:26 PM »

Well I've tried the 1000 tons to represent 100 CBT tons idea out myself. It may work. It means an assault mech has *lots* of hits. Around 1200 in my test. If I use my CBT damage + 5 = mk# assumption for weapons it will take around 100 gauss rifle hits to drop one without crits. That seems high to me. I can also fit a *lot* of weapons using these assumptions.

So I'm wondering if I should keep with this x10 rule and change my weapon mk guide, or if I should try the other way around.

I've been playing around with missiles as well. They are proving just as problematic as I expected. For starters there is the AA rules that allow each launcher to dump out a bunch of missles per round. I guess that makes sense in that AA rounds are 6 times longer than CBT rounds. I'm currently playing around with the idea that a LRM5 is 1 AA launcher, while a LRM 20 is 4. This doesn't allow the mech to put as many missiles downrange per minute as CBT however. The biggest problem with missiles is that in AA bigger missiles go further and hit harder, while in CBT short range missiles hit harder. I'm thinking of possibly making a special rule for that "SRMs have 1/2 normal range but count as twice the number of missiles for salvo calculations". I'm not sure if that will help or not, but am thinking that these phantom missiles in the salvo calculation would not count for the maximum number of missiles per salvo on the target size. So normally a small target can only have 9 missiles per salvo, but with SRMs it would be 9 actual missiles but calculated as 18 (which would allow much nastier hits).

Thunderbolt missile launchers are another problem too.

My next few experiments will be with missiles and trying different mass multiplication factors. I'm thinking AA mass = CBT mass * 5 might be a bit closer to the survivability and weapon capacity of CBT. If this doesn't work then I may have to rethink the weapon mk# thing again.

markc · « **Reply #23 on:** May 06, 2014, 07:57:49 PM »

Note from tablet so.not as easy for.me to type as on a PC.

In Armored Reserves they have an advanced MIRC that basically divides all/most of the mass of parts by 10.
I also agree that max weapon payload might be a good add to the system/conversion. But even then you have to be carefule IMHO with just what you allow on the MIRC Frame
MDC

pyrotech · « **Reply #24 on:** May 08, 2014, 05:36:58 PM »

Well my latest experiment was to try to convert an actual mech to AA.

Changes to my previous assumptions are:

AA tons = CBT tons x 5 (not 10 as I last tried)

Weapon Mk # = CBT damage +6 (not 5 as I last tried, except for machine guns which I kept at mk 6)

Additional assumptions I made were:

Mech frequently for scouting (such as this Pheonix Hawk) would have slightly better sensors and ECM capabilites, but not drastically better. So I used rating 3 for these instead of 2 as I have previously.

My results look pretty good for the most part:
(sorry the formatting is still a mess - I need to find a better way to format these)

(click to show/hide)

I still need to look at how survivable a mech really is in AA under fire to insure I'm not overgunning or undergunning them.

Still working on missiles and heat sinks. I've starting looking at ways to model the more advanced tech as well. XL engines, endo-steel, and ferro-fiberous armor, and Streak Missile systems should be pretty easy. But ER lasers, pulse lasers, and double heat sinks may need more tweaking.

Any opinions on how this came out?

markc · « **Reply #25 on:** May 08, 2014, 06:19:00 PM »

I think it looks good.

The reason I thought of x10 was to include the heat-sinks and all of the other stuff. I was going to increase the mass/size of weapons above MG stage, at least that was as far as I got.

I also thought that when a mech warrior took damage from heat I was going to have that damage be 20+6d210 or maybe even 10d10 damage. This was do to the fact that in SM2 or SM:P the PC's had more hits and an average Joe in my game had around 50.

MDC

DragonReborn · « **Reply #26 on:** May 09, 2014, 06:39:35 AM »

Wow, it's great to see so many people still interested in the Battletech game. Regarding our approach. We do actually like the original BT rules and have looked only for a suitable RPG system to support a campaign. The vehicles constructed inside the BT universe are also pretty rules heavy, especially with regards to the Battle Value system attached to it (since it is only relevant for tournament play, it can be ignored).

Making SM2 fit for Battletech however required a few more skills to be introduced to the character sheets. We added:
- Gunnery Projectile
- Gunnery Energy
- Gunnery Missile
- Piloting Battlemech
- Piloting Conventional (Hovercraft / Tanks)
- Piloting Aerospace

in order to support the complete line up of the Battletech life paths in various source books. The linked stats were the same provided for other gunnery/piloting skill checks and distributed alike for the various professions in our character Excel sheet.

Depending on the amount of skill ranks, the sheet would give you then a BT Gunnery and Piloting value.

We have one character who was a fighter pilot from the start without telling the group. Since he was a really bad Battlemech pilot, he surprised everybody when they could make their escape from an airfield in a stolen shuttle thanks to him ;-).

The Mark system is also present in SM2 and I use it quite a lot when generating weaponry for the group. For example, until recently the guys have had only Mark I projectile weapons that they picked up at various spots. Energy weapons were by definition a lot stronger having at least Mark III. That led to quite some complaining by the types who could only fire with bullets. Lucky for them, they hit jackpot in a derelict research station where they found two prototypes: an assault rifle and a portable machine gun that fires electricity enriched uranium rounds. Talking about a Mark IV projectile gun that requires uranium rounds as well as energy packs and delivers a Puncture and an Electricity Crit on a successfull hit.

I stretched the BT universe a bit when I had hordes of animated lvl2 husks (Resident Evil anybody?) attack them on their way out.

Boy that was a slaughter....

DragonReborn · « **Reply #27 on:** May 09, 2014, 07:17:05 AM »

I translated the two guns just for fun

See attachment...

pyrotech · « **Reply #28 on:** May 09, 2014, 10:08:04 AM »

By far the most successful campaign I've ever ran in 28 years of GM'ing was a 2 year long Mechwarrior 3rd edition game. Set just before the FedCom civil war the PCs were Star League intelligence agents working with/for ROM. Those PCs got mauled by everything from genetically recreated dinosaurs on a failed Star League era tourist-trap planet to Clan Jade Falcon agents and warriors. But Capellons and Blakists were by far their favorite targets.

The strongest features of that campaign was that 1) the universe is incredibly detailed with background but very open for PCs to make a major impact without changing the course of the whole timeline; 2) the lifepath system worked hand in hand with the detailed background to create a very organic and believable character with a relatively complete history; 3) the damage system tended to maim long before it would kill, allowing PCs to survive high tech weapon fire with prompt medical care. Unfortunately the system also had some extremely deep flaws as well.

I would love a chance to run my players through the Blakist Jihad with a better set of mechanics. As I've said before, my preference would be HARP Sci-fi, but it is much easier to convert Spacemaster to HARP than it is to convert Mechwarrior to either Spacemaster or HARP.

My current idea is to start with around 3rd level PCs in HARP (maybe around 5th level for spacemaster, but my experience here is poor). Using the BT/MW lifepaths I would populate the cultural skills, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level training packages, then let the players spend their remaining points to flesh out the characters. I'm not sure yet about event rolls as they can ruin a character before you can even play it without edge points. Perhaps I will allow a few extra Fate Points at character generation to mimic how edge was used in the lifepath system.

My other goal with these conversion exercises is to start finding a good system to build HARP Sci-Fi vehicles with. Without a vehicle construction guide yet, it can be a bit challenging to build a new vehicle and have it balance with the existing ones from the book. I still haven't gotten a copy of SS, but I do have the Spacemaster vehicle law book and now AA to compare against. I have been able to find decent sets of guidelines to make starships for HARP from Gurps Vehicles, but that system is a bit too detailed for my tastes and the 4e Starships rules are too coarse to allow me to tweak it in.

Regards,

News:

Author Topic: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2 (Read 3942 times)

pyrotech

Re: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2

pyrotech

Re: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2

pyrotech

Re: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2

markc

Re: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2

pyrotech

Re: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2

markc

Re: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2

DragonReborn

Re: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2

DragonReborn

Re: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2

pyrotech

Re: Battletech / Mechwarrior with SM2