Battletech in Traveller?

[batminimus]

HI all just a question as a new player and no game ref experience i would like to know now how to use the design sequences to create a Battlemech in the Traveller setting?
Would it be possible?
I have an idea to use it in a one off adventure i am trying to put together. Has anyone any ideas to help?

thanks
Specter.

 

[parmasson]

Hello and warmest welcome Specter!

It has come up before. The biggest stumbling block I can remember I that Traveller has contragrav technology. Why walk when you can fly! Get rid of contragrav and it gets easier. Only problem then becomes those ships with 3G acceleration! Look up Fire Fusion and Steel. For the designed orientated it seems to be something akin to a second bible.

 

[selunatic2397]

The last and only time I refereed a traveller game that involved battlemechs, a soreloser player [his mechs kept being wasted by the other players...who usually used light grav tanks or small fighters] sent me a note asking what the effects of a fusion drive on the battle field would be.

My reply was to ask if that was what he really wanted to do...his reply was YES.

My answer was that if he got down low enough he would pretty much boil the bedrock with the rough equivilent of a small solar flare. He stated verbally that he was doing it

I described what he was doing, how he hovered over the battle field. The gamers jeered him as a loser and a crybaby.

Then I said there was a bright blue light from the ships drives [my only high tech guide was larry niven and the kzinti in one story did just what the loser did so I "borrowed" some descriptions].

I waited for any statements of shooting at the ancient ship that the loser used religiously...but they all just jeered and teased...until I gave up on them...

That is, until I stated that everyone was dead...there was no roars of outrage...we just never put battle mechs in our games again...and the loser died in more friendly fire "accidents" than I have ever seen in any of my campaigns to date.

 

[aramis]

There are combat walkers in two edition's canon, and 4 editions with design sequences that can produce them.

MT has the Dynchia Strider, comparable to some of the light armless mechs, and another walker, both in DGP's 101 vehicles.

2300 has walkers, but their really closer to elementals and ultralight mechs (<20 BT Tons). It also has sufficient cybernetics to justify neurohelmets... or plugs...

TNE and T4 both also have legged vehicle design sequences in FF&S. As does T20. GURPS Vehicles can also do mechs.

No edition has true "mecha" in the sense of neurohelmet controlled 15+m tall humaniforms... but you could build them.

 

[Chaos]

Originally posted by Aramis:
*snip*
2300 has walkers, but their really closer to elementals and ultralight mechs (<20 BT Tons). It also has sufficient cybernetics to justify neurohelmets... or plugs...

TNE and T4 both also have legged vehicle design sequences in FF&S. As does T20. GURPS Vehicles can also do mechs.
*snip*

FWIW I´ve always considered Battle Dress to be more or less equivalent to Elementals. One of those, I might re-create the classic Elemental types with the T20 design rules...

 

[mbrinkhues]

Originally posted by selunatic2397:
The last and only time I refereed a
<cut>
I described what he was doing, how he hovered over the battle field. The gamers jeered him as a loser and a crybaby.

Then I said there was a bright blue light from the ships drives [my only high tech guide was larry niven and the kzinti in one story did just what the loser did so I "borrowed" some descriptions].
<cut>

Actually it was the Humans during first contact with the Kzinti. They still used a reaction drive and employed it as a last ditch defence weapon.

The real funny part is: The Humans had psycho-conditioned themselfs to be non-violent up to the point of becoming a peaceniks wet dream. The whole conditioning went down the drain in seconds when the Kzinti attacked the human ship (and the ships counseler states it afterwards)

Side note: The "Known Space" (aka Ringworld, Man-Kzinti Wars) universe is one of the three I regularly plunder for ideas. The other two are Pournelles "Future History" (CoDo, Moat, The Mercenary, WarWorld etc) and Poul Andersons "Technical" (Polysotechnical League, Domenic Flandry)

 

[epicenter00]

Greetings, Specter and welcome.

It's possible in a number of versions of Traveller to create walking and walker type vehicles. I guess the question I have to pose to you, which version of Traveller are you trying to design for? I'm assuming Traveller for the D20 system, but ... ?

 

[vegascat]

Has anyone figured out a tangible benifit for using mechs?
In cutoff systems that never aquired grav tech or jump drive, Mechs could be the local version of a nobles war steed.
With medical advances in brain scanning tech, mechs with neural control may have reflex advantages.
The weight and complexity issues would have a tendency to outweigh most other advantages.

 

[mbrinkhues]

Actually: There is none.

Small walker vehicles, mostly quads, in the 2-10to class might be an alternative to wheeled vehicles in some terrain. IIRC the US-Army made some studies along that lines back in the 50s. BUT: Those where planned as cargo carriers, replacing the 4WD trucks in the supply chain for the last few miles, they where not considered combat plattform[1]

Mechs in the BattleTech sense make none. They are 10+ meter targets that survive due to game mechanisms (Weak weapons, strong armor) and a warfare environment where stealth does not exist.

Mechs in the "Heavy Gear" or "2300AD" sense (smaller than 5m, lighter than 10to) might work as fast scouts and mobile gun plattforms, replacing The F-part in IFV.

[1] Not that GI-Joe wouldn't have found a way to mount a .50 on them. He always does. Well, so does Schütze A(r)sch for his MG42-59.

 

[The Hinterworlds Rambler]

IMTU, mechs like that are Sporting goods.

One application seen could be in All-Terrain Weaponry. A six or four legged pallet chassis with lockable joints. These could climb up to high ground to fill an anti aircraft role or artillery role, but firing from a non-traditional position in normal ground Warfare. Economically minded sorts would most likely have a standard frame with interchangable weapon systems.

Something like that clanking towards enemies might also have psychological effects, or could be made to.

 

[veltyen]

Has anyone figured out a tangible benifit for using mechs?

As far as I can tell, "they look cool" is the only benefit.

On the other hand, something like a veritech fighter might make some sense.

<Some quick back of the spreadsheet calculations later>

Hmmm.

T20 design
7000 VL TL14 Airframe legged fighter
Agility 8 in air, 6 on ground (battery assisted)
Max speed
960 kmph on jets,
36 kmph on legs,
28 kmph offroad legs
200 EP output TL13 fusion reactor
1000 EP/hour TL14 batteries
AR 14
SI 60
Crew positions: 2
2 Str 60, Dex 14 appendages
Comms: Radio, Laser, Maser 5000 km (all)
Sensors: Holovideo 2km w/LI IR, Radar 50km
1000 VL weapons payload

Total Cost 2 million Creds or so depending on computerisation. The grav drive to move a vehicle that size arround at that speed costs more then that alone, and has a lower agility.

Think of it is a small vtol subsonic microfighter with overengineered landing gear if you like.

 

[mbrinkhues]

Originally posted by Baron Saarthuran von Gushiddan:
IMTU, mechs like that are Sporting goods.

One application seen could be in All-Terrain Weaponry. A six or four legged pallet chassis with lockable joints. These could climb up to high ground to fill an anti aircraft role or artillery role, but firing from a non-traditional position in normal ground Warfare. Economically minded sorts would most likely have a standard frame with interchangable weapon systems.

Something like that clanking towards enemies might also have psychological effects, or could be made to.

Unless your version of Traveller does NOT contain contra-gravity, walkers are pretty useless military wise.

They need a relatively high TL due to the necessary computers and balancers and they are less mobile than grav vehicles.

 

[clementk]

My stock reply re: mechs in the Traveller Universe-

There are such units serving the Imperium or Regional armed forces in some capacity (one of the MT books) and designs and support for designs in various Traveller design systems. Treat mecha as another tool, another vehicle, another option not the only weapon needed and never forget to use combined arms and good strategy and tactics.

Most plausible for military/merc/spec ops/police types are "big BD" types like Shirow's landmates or hard suits, powered armor/BD like Starship Troopers (the inspiration for Gundam) Bubblegun Crisis and the like, and insect types like Shirow's Fuchikomas/Tachikomas*. Less plausible, due to being taller, Votoms, Heavy Gears, or more recently Gasaraki's units. A variety of drive modes would be helpful, and several of those units have such, usually a roller (wheeled) or tread mode. There's some possibilty for space use, esp. for modified forms like spheres or smallcraft/fighters with arm units.

Exoskeletons, like Aliens' walker, or bigger industrial/construction units, like Patlabor's labors are ok by me, and IIRC are depicted in T4. While they are getting too big really, the various tanks with legs by Shirow or in (esp.) Patlabor have some potential, and don't have to be much taller than a tank. Besides, the sight of a big spider crawling at undisciplined lower TL infantry is fun. ^__^

Given that Traveller is set in the Far Future, advancements in materials, construction methods, targetting, ECM, weapons, etc. give enough leeway IMO for a creative player or referee. Even Gundam has a scientific handwave of particles that screw up sensors and communication to very close ranges. That and people tend to view grav vehicles as very reliable and sturdy, when they could easily be vulnerable to a solid hit on a thruster or grav unit esp in civilian models or lower tech levels. For that matter there's nothing saying mechs can't have grav, as BD already can.

The main thing though is to have fun and not be limited to what any design system or rules state if it gets in the way. Mechs can be quite fun and allow for a mech for each character or a tank-like team mech.

* which double as robot units with base AI as well as carrying/driven by riders

 

[The Hinterworlds Rambler]

What TL are we talking here? Grav vehicles trump everything, definitely.

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by Baron Saarthuran von Gushiddan:
What TL are we talking here? Grav vehicles trump everything, definitely.

And here's an example of Grav Uber Alles.

From a gross stat comparison POV, not from a usage/campaign one. Not every situation calls for an expensive grav vehicle that may not work well in the target area, nor can such vehicles be maintained in every environment or economy. 11,000 worlds plus.

Nor would I send in just grav vehicles in a military situation if I had options, just like you don't normally send in just treaded vehicles or helicoptors today.

 

[Valarian]

The lightest Battlemech, the Locust, is 20 tons. That's 28000vl to fill. The largest, the Atlas, is 100 tons (140000vl). That's an awfully big vehicle to fill with fusion plant, armour, weapons etc. I think even the lighter battlemechs would trump a grav tank - even if they're tied to the ground.

Grav vehicles have the speed advantage. Even so, they aren't that much of a threat except maybe en masse against a solitary 'mech. This doesn't occur very much as 'mechs are placed in lances of four as the lowest military unit. In Battletech the grav vehicles can move over terrain but can't get much altitude. Is this the same in Traveller?

The biggest problem with the Battletech universe and Traveller are the distances between the stars. The jump drive in Battletech jumps 30ly at a time.

 

[mbrinkhues]

The main problem with mechs is size. IRL the good old Bagger (Marder I IFV) of the Bundeswehr is generally considered "very tall" and the Patton tanks are referred to as "Barn". And those come in slightly smaller than 3 meters.

BattleMechs come in 8-12 meters, making them awfully huge and difficult to cammoflage. And don't think about digging defensive positions.

Another problem is that Traveller armor is non-ablativ (unlike the BT armor) So that Atlas can be killed by a guy with a Panzerfaust in the Traveller universe.

Add in that grav-tanks like the Trepinda are quite big (IIRC the weight/size of a current MBT, 60+ tons) and that you can easily build a Grav "Maus" (120to). Add in Travellers far more powerful sensor/computer technologie and it is "fast, mobile brig of armor" vs. "big target".

Guess what the recommended way for killing a IS-2 with a Panzer V "Panter" was: Use your mobility, drive around it, kill it from the flanks.

And vehicles are allowed to operate in platoons too.

 

[Pickles]

Specter, welcome to the CotI "Arr, it'll never work, you know" boards! Hope we haven't put you off already. Put down that can-opnere and step away from those worms ...

Really, there is no conceivable reason for battlemechs. It's been argued to death on anime boards like Macross World. They're very cool, though, and I for one have had many happy hours of gaming out of the Battletech background (I note it's also 'classic' now).

Valarian, I wouldn't use direct conversions of BT to CT tonnages. I'm pretty sure BT tons are referring to weight, not volume, more like conventional armoured vehicles.

 

[The Hinterworlds Rambler]

I have a hard time picturing what sort of circumstance could lead to giant robot manufacture, even as a kid watching Mazinger or Gai-King, i thot it was pretty wierd, and oh so Japan. Even desides being cool, Macross and Transformers done make a lot of sense (but are fun)

 

[DaveChase]

Maybe not Mechs, but bigger Power Armour.

As for practical use of 'mechs' look at Heavy Gear RPG. The history behind that universe of using the mechs is more believable.

The only use that I could see of Mechs is world/system where the society view makes human the model for everything. (or at least organic) What I mean is the society develops everything to mimic or follow nature design and never develop a mechanic/machine look. Ie. Flying is developed but planes still use a flapping motion instead of what we have today. Ie. Social idealism rules design more than tech advances.

Just one concept of why Human Mechs would be made.

Another one is humans work better in human form, so instead of using a ship to say mine asteriods they use giant human suits (wild specualtions

Dave Chase