Project Knight [Mecha Design Bureau]

If it's anything like a WW2 tank destroyer, the gun is going to have a little bit of azimuth and elevation to play with, for exactly the reason that it's a pain to have to wrangle the whole vehicle around just for a few minutes of angle.

But then again the mech has more degrees of freedom in its movement so maybe all it has to do is wiggle around.
Not very quickly though. The shift to a bipedal stance didn't go as smoothly as we liked due to poor dice rolls. I do suggest making the turret the gun more specifically a laser gun as they are cheap and very accurate at long range. The heavy hitters could instead be missiles, rockets, or drones which aren't hampered that much by an inability to easily aim.


If we can get them great. But I don't want to go out of our way to make sure we get them.
Judging by how things are going we won't have to. None of the requirements have been difficult to reach.


I want the heavy weapon to be the main one.
I don't advise that. A big gun that cannot properly aim isn't exactly a very good gun. Mechs also aren't exactly that easy to hide and while the angle can be shifted somewhat by shifting to a bipedal stance it would still require quite a bit of precise footwork which is one area our mech is terrible at. Actuator Precision has been understandably ignored up to this point. We may be better just bombarding the area with rockets or missiles.

so i just checked, and I think we can swing putting 20mm rotory in the auto turret since it's a fairly standard type of weapon at this point that can be used for infantry mulching and point defense. if its undersized for the turret we can put in extra sensors for better point defense work or just accept it being undersized for future proofing to allow more flexability in after market mods.
Not a bad idea. Would be a pretty good fall back if we can't get a good enough power source for the laser turret.
 
Last edited:
for this mech I'm actually favoring the 20mm over a laser because i want it to be able to better shred cover and suppress infantry if needed.
I do see though I prefer the laser due to not having to worry about ammo and the greater range, plus they are cheap! Though could we have the turret switch between the two? Use the laser function to start engagements at range and switching to the 20mm when they get close? The auto turret did say it could hold multiple weapon types.
 
If it's anything like a WW2 tank destroyer, the gun is going to have a little bit of azimuth and elevation to play with, for exactly the reason that it's a pain to have to wrangle the whole vehicle around just for a few minutes of angle.

But then again the mech has more degrees of freedom in its movement so maybe all it has to do is wiggle around.
There are plenty of real world armoured vehicles that have worked fine with a forward firing main gun. In particular with units focused on defense, being able to set ambushes with a large weapon seems perfect for what we are building.
Hate to break it to you, but;

E | S-AGI - Skeletal Agility is our current rating, which is going to get worse when we add guns and armor,

And
Once weapon mounts and systems are decided, you'll be able to choose an engine and other internal systems in support of the weapons capabilities you want the Mech to have.
We have nothing that's going to notably improve S-AGI coming up, unless QM decides to throw us a bone with some really hefty add-ons.

So that Heavy Mount hull gun isn't going to hit anything that isn't bigger and/or slower than we are - which means that unless it's an ambush (which shitcans a majority of the pirate hunting aspect) or a set piece field battle, it's going to miss most targets.

Unless it has either a Hear Ye, Hear Ye kill radius or is accurate on the level of a guided missile, which can theoretically address the issue but limits our weapon choices for that slot.

And a high Drive Speed just makes the accuracy issues worse.
 
Last edited:
I do see though I prefer the laser due to not having to worry about ammo and the greater range, plus they are cheap! Though could we have the turret switch between the two? Use the laser function to start engagements at range and switching to the 20mm when they get close? The auto turret did say it could hold multiple weapon types.
really comes down to what fits there. i mean if we could make the auto turret an expy of a bradly turret without interfering with the heavy cannon that's gonna make this an absolute terror of a combat unit.
 
Not very quickly though. The shift to a bipedal stance didn't go as smoothly as we liked due to poor dice rolls.
So that Heavy Mount hull gun isn't going to hit anything that isn't bigger and/or slower than we are - which means that unless it's an ambush (which shitcans a majority of the pirate hunting aspect) or a set piece field battle, it's going to miss most targets.
No, I mean as in the gun itself can traverse a few degrees in the mount. It's not literally fixed to the hull. This is why casemate mounts work as well as they do--the firing arcs are smaller than they would be with a full turret, but they're not zero and the tank destroyer can engage everything in front of it just fine.

Given that our clients prefer defensive tactics and our brief requires us to defeat AFVs of our weight class, ambush tactics work just fine by me.
 
It's not literally fixed to the hull.
From what I understand it kinda is. It is an embedded mount. It can only aim at what the central hull is pointing at. I much rather put rockets or drones in there.

really comes down to what fits there. i mean if we could make the auto turret an expy of a bradly turret without interfering with the heavy cannon that's gonna make this an absolute terror of a combat unit.
Complete agreement on that one. That would be the best case scenario.
 
Hmm for the rear external mount I'm thinking either a drone dock so this thing can have its own UAV spotter or I suppose an anti infantry drone to cover it from someone running up and satchel charging it's back legs. Or claymore mines to do the same thing but cheaper, spot some bastards on your rear and fill you rear arc with ball-bearings.
 
@Verisaimilitude when you make the next vote post can you please be sure to address if the team has any concerns about how useful a given weapon will be based on the type of mount and agility of the unit? There have been concerns about how a fixed cannon would be less then useful and I would like their to be confirmation on if those concerns are valid.
 
No, I mean as in the gun itself can traverse a few degrees in the mount. It's not literally fixed to the hull. This is why casemate mounts work as well as they do--the firing arcs are smaller than they would be with a full turret, but they're not zero and the tank destroyer can engage everything in front of it just fine.

Given that our clients prefer defensive tactics and our brief requires us to defeat AFVs of our weight class, ambush tactics work just fine by me.
There is a world of difference between a horizontal traverse of 15 degrees or thereabouts - as is the case with a lot of historical tank destroyers and SPGs, including a couple of niche modern ones - and 70 degrees or thereabouts, as is the case with some others.

The latter is vaguely tolerable as a any-weapon slot for a Small-chassis CV, if and only if we get our drive speed good and high for repositioning - I would prefer at least a B (currently C-), assuming we can manage a decent armor value for that.

The former is an anchor round this chassis' neck due to the low S-AGI, and will require some limitations in weapon choice to make up for it.

As a point of comparison, consider that most modern SPG and TDs use turrets - even the light and speedy ones.
 
Last edited:
A huge part of the issue is that we're still learning the system as we play. we don't know if embedded are hard fixed, gimball mounted, sponsons, something else or variable depending on what we select.

we could have semi-damaged our freedom of choice in the embedded focused mounting plans if turns out that in this build system, embedded weapon weapon mounts are mechanically optimized to be put on the arms of humanoid mechs.
 
At the end of the day, this is as much learning for the in game team as it is us, and a cheap mass produced platform that wield a HEAVY embedded weapon to absolutely smack hardened positions from a reasonable distance, while having enough armour and weapons to not die if pressure is applied is and always will be useful.

Personally, Since we cut weight on using embeded instead of a turreted, it means we can go well in on a much Heavier weapon then what a cheap mass produced tank can normally wield. Until we actually see the options, we can't truly judge.

In the worst case scenario where an embedded weapon isn't capable of much traversal (Press X to doubt ) and is useless for engaging fast enough mechs (possible), we can always fall back on giving this thing a Light external Rocket/missile pack, And Light AT gun and put a Heavy Embedded autonomous weapon on it to turn it into a mass produced Drone carrier, Or a Massive Embedded rocket battery that says Fuck your dodging, I'll just hit EVERYTHING.

TL:DR I doubt that traversal for an embedded big gun will be that bad, And even if we do get the options from the GM and it is bad, We still have other weapon categories that we could put in that heavy Embedded hardpoint instead, Like Lock on missiles cosplaying as a mini MLRS, Spray and pray rockets for sheer AOE and Output or autonomous weaponry. so its really not worth worrying about until we actually see the update.
 
Last edited:
we could have semi-damaged our freedom of choice in the embedded focused mounting plans if turns out that in this build system, embedded weapon weapon mounts are mechanically optimized to be put on the arms of humanoid mechs.
Doubt that. The arms would have to be heavily reinforced to prevent the recoil from blowing them off. Pretty sure it just means that the weapon system is integrated into the hull and so its angle is in accordance to the hull itself. The classic chest cannon and the machine guns in the heads of Gundams are examples of this.


we can always fall back on giving this thing a Light external Rocket/missile pack, And Light AT gun and put a Heavy Embedded autonomous weapon on it to turn it into a mass produced Drone carrier, Or a Massive Embedded rocket battery that says Fuck your dodging, I'll just hit EVERYTHING.
You have just described my dream here with this mech. Who needs a gaint cannon when you have the entire Itano Circus and personal drone swarms. Point defense? ESW? Can't see anything under the endless rain of rockets! Mwahahahahahahahahahahahahah!
 
The spider form that was chosen talked about how it allow it to mount heavier weapons then a bipedal mech. I take that to mean that with current tech you can't mount a heavy weapon in the arms, because you can't mount a heavy weapon on a biped.

As for the points where people disagree with me, there is a reason that I pinged the QM and asked them to address the question. People (and I'm not excluding myself here) are reading scores and making assumptions about what exactly they mean. They might be right. They might be wrong. There is insufficient information for a meaningful answer.

On a potentially more productive topic what would people be interested in seeing information about in the Tech Readout post? I'm thinking the two or three most common tanks used by second tier nations, a couple IFV/APCs, and maybe an example of a current gen top tier tank. Anything else to add to the wishlist?
 
Turn 8: Year 4 of Project Knight (Codename: Bushfire) New
Project Knight - Mecha Design Bureau
Turn 8: Year 4 of Project Knight



[X] Plan: Front, Middle, and Back
-[X] Central Hull (Max: 10 Mounting Points in This Location)
--[X] Heavy Embedded Mount (6 MP)
-[X] Frontal Hull (Max: 8 Mounting Points in This Location)
--[X] Light Auto Turret (4 MP, +6 tons)
-[X] Rear Hull (Max: 8 Mounting Points in This Location)
--[X] Light External Mount (2 MP)

Rolls for Chosen Upgrades:
Engineering Rolls: Your team will roll dice for each factor of the design they are trying to impact. The dice roll is a simple d20 modified by their level of training and experience in a given field, versus a difficulty target that must be met or exceeded. The degree of success/failure will then modify the final result accordingly.
Bonus: Well funded! Your engineers roll twice and choose the higher result.

[] Central Hull, Heavy Embedded Mount
Weapons Development (Hull Mounts):
Trained (+2) vs. Extra Difficulty (+0)
Component Protection increases from E to D | 17 vs. 12 - minor success​
Weapons Development (Hull Mounts): Trained (+2) vs. Extra Difficulty (+0)
Tech Simplicity increases from D to C- | 16 vs. 17 - minor failure​

[] Frontal Hull, Light Auto Turret
Weapons Development (Turrets):
Trained (+2) vs. Extra Difficulty (+2)
Power Control increases from D to D+ | 18 vs. 17 - minor success​
Structural Engineering (Turrets)): Trained (+2) vs. Extra Difficulty (+3)
Component Protection does not increase. | 7 vs. 18 - major failure​
Armour Development (Turrets): Trained (+2) vs. Extra Difficulty (+3)
Armour Plating increases from F+ to E- | 17 vs. 13 - minor success​
Structural Engineering (Turrets): Trained (+2) vs. Extra Difficulty (+2)
Material Affordability decreases from B to B- | 15 vs. 14 - minor success​
Weapons Development (Turrets): Trained (+2) vs. Extra Difficulty (+2)
Tech Simplicity does not decrease. | 22* vs. 14 - minor critical success​

[] Rear Hull, Light External Mount
Weapons Development (Hull Mounts):
Trained (+2) vs. Extra Difficulty (+0)
Heat Management increases from D- to D | 21 vs. 14 - minor success​
Weapons Development (Hull Mounts): Trained (+2) vs. Extra Difficulty (+0)
Ease of Maintenance does not increase. | 13 vs. 17 - minor failure​

Building and integrated weapons systems from scratch wasn't going to be easy. Broadly speaking there were two schools of thought in the team: one believed that the heavy lift capacity and gunboat configuration of the hull meant that it could mount much heavier weapons than others might expect. The other believed that the flat-top of the gunboat hull made it well suited for a turret mount in ways that other designs simply were not.

Both options were explored in detail, but as time forced a commitment, you decided to go with a heavy main weapon mounted in the inner central turret, with an auto-turret in front and a simple external mount in back. This should provide a good balance of options when allowing you to approach your requirements. Now it was time to decide what to do next…



Sub-Project 'Heavy Fireside Crawler' (Codename: Bushfire):

Current Prototype (Rough Draft, Slice View w/o Outer Hull):

Displayed above is a Rough Draft Profile of your Heavy Fireside Crawler standing at full height (maximum line of sight for weaponry.) A slice view is used to expose the internals as you outfit it, the exterior hull will be displayed later.


Project Requirements & Ratings:
Basic Requirements:
  1. ❌ Combat Potential: average D or higher
  2. ✅ Logistical Values: average D or higher
  3. ✅ Material Affordability: C or higher
  4. ✅ Build & Repair Speeds: D or higher
  5. ✅ Ease of Maintenance: D or higher
Customer Requirements:
  • Kingdom of Kadiri:
    • ✅ Build & Repair Speeds: C- or higher
    • ✅ Ease of Maintenance: C- or higher
  • Bethnar Republic:
    • ✅ Tech Simplicity C+ or lower
    • ✅ Material Affordability B- or higher
    • ✅ Ease of Maintenance C- or higher
  • Sahel Alliance:
    • ✅ Skeletal Agility E- or higher
    • ❌ Heat Management C- or higher
  • Sagittarian Colonial Coalition:
    • ✅ Weapon Hardpoints C- or higher
    • ❌ Power Control C- or higher
    • ❌ Armour Plating C- or higher

NOTE: I made an unnoticed copypaste error in the previous customer requirements page - you don't have enough Heat Management for the Sahel Alliance requirements to be met yet.

Tech Specs & Ratings:
Dimensions:
Height:
~3.67m
Length: ~6.72m
Breadth: ~2.96m

Tonnage:
Max Tonnage:
71 tons
Chassis Weight: 38 tons (base estimates for cockpit and engine included)
Usable Tonnage: 27 tons (no weapons, subsystems, or external armour plates equipped)

Technical Specifications:

Weapon Mounts:

Heavy Embedded Mount (Size 6, ICT)
Light Auto Turret Mount (Size 2, FCT)
Light External Mount (Size 2, RCT)

Skeletal Design (E+)
  • D | S-EFF Structural Efficiency
  • E+ | S-DUR - Skeletal Durability
  • E | S-AGI - Skeletal Agility
  • D+ | S-STB - Skeletal Stability
  • F+ | S-ACT - Actuator Precision
Combat Potential (E+)
  • C- | C-WPN - Weapons Hardpoints
  • E- | C-ARM - Armour Plating
  • F | C-PTP - Pilot Protection
  • E+ | C-PTJ - Joint Protection
  • D | C-PTC - Component Protection
Weapon Effectiveness (X)
  • X | T-WPN - Armour Penetration
  • X | T-ARM - Damage Output
  • X | T-PTP - Effective Range
  • E- | T-PTJ - Rate of Fire
  • F+ | T-PTC - Weapons Control
Power and Drive Effectiveness (D+)
  • D | P-PWC - Power Control
  • C- | P-LMB - Limb Drive Speed
  • D | P-HTM - Heat Management
Logistical Values (C)
  • B- | L-CST - Material Affordability
  • C- | L-TCH - Tech Simplicity
  • C | L-BNR - Build & Repair Speeds
  • C- | L-EOM - Ease of Maintenance

NOTE: A new ratings category has been added - weapon effectiveness. This determines how dangerous the Mech's weapon systems are expected to be. Rate of Fire has an initial rating offered by your Mech's Heat Management and Power Control, while Weapons Control has an initial rating offered by your choice of chassis design, Skeletal agility/Stability, Actuator Precision, and weapon mount selection. Armour Penetration, Damage Output and Effective Range will be determined primarily by your choice of weapons.

Most of these values start empty at X, except for Weapons Control (which has a baseline value determined by your chassis' maneuverability and initial weapon mount choices).

Note that these ratings are not perfect simulations of the machine's capabilities and do not reflect the specializations of different weapons, and thus will not be a perfect indicator of actual battlefield performance.



Now that we had our mounts, it was time to select a weapon style and configuration for the primary mount. The Heavy Embedded Mount could be largely built in two ways: either by mounting a system that runs from the interior of the hull along the spine before emerging out the front, or by emerging out of the back to provide indirect fire. Each option would come with its own pros and cons.

Once you had decided that, you would then need to look into your weapons options. Your organization had limited weapons production capability, but you were confident you'd be able to produce the basics if you needed to. Alternatively, there were interested suppliers who saw this project as an opportunity to show what they're made of - weapons of the size you were looking to mount weren't typically seen on armoured vehicles, so this provided a unique opportunity for engineers and suits alike.

Now, what to choose for the main heavy weapon?

Weapon Option Details:

Weapon Mount Style:

The core of your weapon will be located in the central hull, but you will need to decide exactly where it will emerge from the hull, which will impact both the design of your mech's internals and its combat style.
[Direct Back Mounted]
This is the easiest system to build, as we'll simply mount the system forward-facing it on top of the spine and extend the hull up a little to cover and protect it. Cheap, easy, and it'll suit any weapon type we want to use and allow for easy venting of heat.​
[+1] Heat Management, [+1] Build & Repair Speed​

[Indirect Back Mounted]
The weapon will be positioned in the rear of the center torso and emerge out of the back. This is optimized for indirect fire systems such as Ballistics and Rockets & Missiles and allows for greater control over the trajectory of your fire and thus its range.​
[+1] Effective Range (unless energy weapons are selected).
[If chosen with Energy Weapons that lack the Anti-Air Tag, the next most popular mount will be chosen instead.]
[Spine Mounted]
Slightly more complicated, this will mount the weapon system just above the spine so that it emerges near the front of the hull. This location allows for the weapon to vent its excess heat more easily across the length of the hull while giving us the best access to the Electroneural system for efficient redirection of power to and from the weapon. Only long weapons with a lengthy profile (e.g. ballistic and energy weapons) can truly benefit from this.​
[+1] Power Control, [+1] Heat Management
[If chosen with Rockets & Missiles or Drones, the next most popular mount will be chosen instead.]

[Nose Mounted]
This mount is positioned deep in the interior of the Mech and emerges from the nose of the Mech. This protects the weapon from enemy fire and is optimal for precision aim of the weapon, but takes up a lot of space and will make it harder to build around it.
[+1] Component Protection, [+1] Weapons Control
[-1] Penalty applied to future rolls when building internal components in the Central Hull and Frontal Hull.​

[Belly Mounted]
This mount is not very efficient as a weapons location. The low position on the body emerges from the lower frontal hull - this position makes it more challenging to get shots on target, but it does make it very easy to access for maintenance, while also keeping the weapon in a hidden location that protects it from enemy fire.​
[+1] Component Protection, [+1] Ease of Maintenance
[-1] Weapons Control
[If chosen with Drones, Anti-Air or Point Defence, the next most popular mount will be chosen instead.]
Weapon Mount Modularity:
You can customize the configuration of your weapon mounts, making them more or less restrictive to allow for customizable loadouts in the field. While it does not directly impact the effectiveness of the weapon, it will improve the number of reconfiguration options available to them, which may make them more appealing to customers.
[Fully Integrated Mount]
This system is built entirely as part of the chassis and cannot be removed or replaced without a complete overhaul. This is the simplest type of mount to implement, but makes it completely impractical to change the weapon in the mount.​
[+1] Material Affordability, [+1] Tech Simplicity, [+1] Build & Repair Speeds
[-1] Weapon Hardpoints
[No Weapon Swaps Allowed]

[Simple Modular Mount]
This system is set up to enable easy removal and replacement of the weapons system with other weapon systems of the same type (e.g. rockets with rockets, missiles with missiles). Adds a small amount of customizability and makes maintenance easier.​
[+1] Ease of Maintenance
[Same Type Weapon Swaps Allowed]

[Complex Modular Mount]
This system goes a step further, allowing for easy module swaps for weapons of the same category (e.g. rockets with missiles, missiles with rockets). Adds greater customizability at a premium price.​
[+1] Weapon Hardpoints, [+1] Ease of Maintenance
[-1] Tech Simplicity, [-1] Material Affordability
[Same Category Weapon Swaps Allowed]

[Universal Modular Mount]
This complex system is designed to allow for the easy replacement and install of any weapon type. This is a very difficult and complex system to implement, so while it provides great flexibility, it also comes at great cost.​
[+2] Weapon Hardpoints, [+1] Ease of Maintenance
[-2] Tech Simplicity, [-1] Material Affordability, [-1] Build & Repair Speeds
[Any Weapon Swaps Allowed]

Heavy Weapon Systems:
This weapon mount sacrifices your pilot's control of the relevant weapon systems in exchange for a dedicated autonomous gunner and an excellent range of fire. It is not recommended to build more than one turret as they will limit each others' arcs of fire.
[152mm Battle Cannon]
[In-House Build]

Our weapons engineers have proposed a 150mm cannon which we believe will be more than capable of taking out the enemy up close or from a distance. It's simple, easy to build, easy to service, and militaries around the world are already familiar with systems of this type of weapon and will be able to source parts locally.​
[5 tons, size 4. 1x Attack. Average range. Average accuracy. Average damage. Average reload. Versatile ammo types. 25 ammo capacity).]
[+2] Armour Penetration, [+2] Damage Output, [+2] Effective Range, [+1] Rate of Fire, [+1] Weapons Control
[+1] Heat Management, [+1] Build & Repair Speeds, [+1] Ease of Maintenance​

[70mm Multiple Rocket Pod Array]
[In-House Build]

The other weapon system our engineers are confident in engineering themselves is an array of mid-range rocket pods. Once fired, rockets are unable to alter their trajectory mid-flight, making them inaccurate. On the flipside, they are extremely cheap and easy to build - the whole system is idiot-proof and basically any industrialized state should be able to produce, customize, and maintain these with ease. Their ability to penetrate armour and damage targets is poor individually, but the sheer volume of fire can saturate a target area or overwhelm targets at close range.​
[4 tons, size 6. 20x Attacks. Average range. Low accuracy. Low damage. Very Slow reload. 100 ammo capacity). Weak vs. Point Defence.]
[+1] Armour Penetration, [+3] Damage Output, [+2] Effective Range
[-1] Rate of Fire
[+1] Material Affordability, [+1] Tech Simplicity, [+1] Build & Repair Speeds, [+1] Ease of Maintenance​

[148mm Rifled Cannon]
[Built By: Tama Industries, Mali, Sahel Alliance]

We have been approached by the Sahel Alliance. Even though they have lingering concerns about our Mech's ability to manage its heat in high-temperature environments, they are still interested. They're offering us cheap access to their locally-produced rifled anti-tank guns. They're not as easy to maintain and are limited to older, simpler types of munitions, but that might suit our potential customers - and it might convince the Sahelians to buy the mech.​
[4.5 tons, size 4. 1x Attack. Average range. Average accuracy. Average damage. Average reload. 25 ammo capacity).]
[+2] Armour Penetration, [+2] Damage Output, [+2] Effective Range, [+1] Rate of Fire, [+1] Weapons Control
[+1] Heat Management, [+1] Material Affordability, [+1] Build & Repair Speeds
[If chosen, the Sahel Coalition will buy this Mech even if we don't meet their full requirements.]​

[Surface-to-Ground Missile Battery]
[Built By: Vanderbright Unlimited, Posoga, North Atlantea]

Go figure, wherever a weapon's being made, the Atlanteans are going to stick their nose in it. They'll sell weapons to just about anyone who isn't closely allied with the Chinese - and to their credit, they're good at it. Vanderbright is the leading weapons developer in the Federation, and their SGMs are accurate and deadly. Unfortunately, they also charge a premium for their systems - and the Atlanteans will place restrictive export controls on who we can sell to. They promise they'll find alternative clients for us - but will they keep that promise?​
[3 tons, size 5. 6x Attacks. High range. High accuracy. Average damage. Slow reload. 48 ammo capacity). Weak vs. Point Defence & EWS. Must be at least Short Range to fire.]
[+3] Armour Penetration, [+2] Damage Output, [+3] Effective Range, [+1] Weapons Control
[-1] Material Affordability
[If chosen, you cannot sell this system to the Kingdom of Kadiri, but the NAF promise to find you a replacement client before the end of the project.]​

[High Energy Heavy Laser Cannon]
[Built By: Wuhan Armouries, Hubei, Ning Dynasty]

Leave it to the Imperial Court to sniff out the Atlantean interest. The day after we received the offer from Vanderbright, the state-owned Wuhan Armoury contacted us. The Ning produce plenty of effective weapons in our price range, and they'd be interested in selling us the Type 22c, the budget version of their latest heavy laser cannon. It's a lightweight and effective overall system - a little more expensive than a battle cannon, but the lack of ammunition is a big plus. On the flipside, it runs pretty hot and needs a lot of juice to fire - it's more dependent on your Power Control rating than other weapons, and generates a lot more heat than other weapon types.​
[3 tons, size 3. 1x Attack. Average range. High accuracy. Average damage. Average recharge. High power draw.]
[+2] Armour Penetration, [+2] Damage Output, [+2] Effective Range, [+1] Rate of Fire, [+2] Weapons Control
[-1] Heat Management​

[Charged Particle Beam Weapon]
[Built By: Excalibur Systems, Logria, Brythonic Commonwealth

If we're feeling a little more experimental, our contacts in Logria suggest the Commonwealth could be convinced to supply us with their latest directed energy weapon - the Charged Particle Beam. This complex system launches a condensed beam of highly charged particles at the speed of light - these can be highly destructive, but scatter and lose cohesion across even short distances. Unfortunately, the system is still relatively new and prone to shorts and breakdowns.​
[6 tons, size 6. 1x Attack. Very Short Range. Average Accuracy. Very High damage. Slow recharge. High power draw. Increased range in Void Environments.]
[+4] Armour Penetration, [+4] Damage Output, [+1] Weapons Control
[-1] Heat Management, [-1] Tech Simplicity, [-1] Ease of Maintenance​

[Heavy Drone Dock]
[Built By: Chennai Aerodrome, Worker's Union of Bharat]

If we're looking for a good drone system, there's no one better qualified to produce it for us than India. Chennai Aerodrome has built more combat drones than anyone else over the last century and they have systems suited to our budget. The CM2 is a medium drone bomber designed to be launched from trucks and air carriers, but we could easily build a suitable drone dock for their systems on the flat top of our Gunship hull. Unfortunately, the large docking system is not only complex, but represents a lightly armoured weak spot across much of the hull.​
[7 tons, size 6. 1x Drone w/ 2x Bombs. Long Range. Medium Accuracy. High Damage. Very Slow Reload. 4 ammo capacity. Vulnerable to EWS.]
[+3] Armour Penetration, [+3] Damage Output, [+3] Effective Range, [+1] Weapons Control
[-1] Rate of Fire
[-1] Armour Plating, [-1] Tech Simplicity​



New Vote: How are we configuring and outfitting the large Heavy Weapon mount?
Approval voting is used to represent some level of chaos and unpredictability in a large project like this - not everything is always going to come out perfect, and you'll have to do your best to make it work at each stage of development. There will be some time at the end of a project to refine and address flaws or contradictions in the design, depending on how much funding you receive for the project. The top vote from each category will win - ties will be resolved with a coin flip/die roll.
Usable Tonnage: 27 tons (no weapons, subsystems, or external armour plates equipped)

[] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[] [Style] Indirect Back Mounted
[] [Style] Nose Mounted
[] [Style] Spine Mounted
[] [Style] Belly Mounted

[] [Modularity] Fully Integrated Mount
[] [Modularity] Simple Modular Mount
[] [Modularity] Complex Modular Mount
[] [Modularity] Universal Modular Mount

[] [Weapon] 152mm Battle Cannon (In-House Build)
[] [Weapon] 70mm Multiple Rocket Pod Array (In-House Build)
[] [Weapon] 148mm Rifled Cannon (Sahel Alliance)
[] [Weapon] Surface-to-Ground Missile Battery (North Atlantean Federation)
[] [Weapon] High Energy Laser Cannon (Ning Dynasty)
[] [Weapon] Charged Particle Beam Weapon (Brythonic Commonwealth)
[] [Weapon] Heavy Drone Dock (Worker's Union of Bharat)



Apologies for the long wait after the vote closed, this was a chunky one and I had a busy evening and energy crashed once I got back to my desk, so I didn't finish it before I absolutely needed some sleep. I'm likely to be busy Tuesday as well so I'm going to leave the vote open until .

The two light weapons will be done after the decision on the heavy weapon is made, since there are dependencies in play.

I'll go through and try to check I haven't missed answering any important questions in the comments, but regarding the questions around agility and how that can affect your ability to use certain weapons, I've tried to roughly model it in the new 'Weapon Effectiveness' ratings, as well as blocking off certain weapons from certain mount styles to prevent you from dead ending yourself. Low Weapons Control will mean you have trouble directing and aiming the weapon in question, some weapons and mount options will improve this (and you can invest in subsystems to try to help later), but the more accuracy the weapon requires (e.g. a cannon or laser) the more painful that will be.

Hopefully no critical mistakes in this as I'm up early and trying to get it out the door. Shout if you see something.
 
Last edited:
On a potentially more productive topic what would people be interested in seeing information about in the Tech Readout post? I'm thinking the two or three most common tanks used by second tier nations, a couple IFV/APCs, and maybe an example of a current gen top tier tank. Anything else to add to the wishlist?
Any potentially interesting or unique forms of technology that had cropped up. Even if they were only in lab settings I like seeing how ingenuity has created some nifty things and at best we can even take inspiration from them.
 
[X] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[X] [Modularity] Simple Modular Mount
[X] [Weapon] Heavy Drone Dock (Worker's Union of Bharat)
 
Our Combat Potential is now below. We need to fix this at minimum. Secondary would be heat management but not as important.

Before you panic too much, know that you have a lot of potential to gain combat potential once you get to deciding armour plating, since you'll be able to upgrade potentially 4 ratings in that area.
 
[Heavy Drone Dock]
[Built By: Chennai Aerodrome, Worker's Union of Bharat]

If we're looking for a good drone system, there's no one better qualified to produce it for us than India. Chennai Aerodrome has built more combat drones than anyone else over the last century and they have systems suited to our budget. The CM2 is a medium drone bomber designed to be launched from trucks and air carriers, but we could easily build a suitable drone dock for their systems on the flat top of our Gunship hull. Unfortunately, the large docking system is not only complex, but represents a lightly armoured weak spot across much of the hull.[7 tons, size 6. 1x Drone w/ 2x Bombs. Long Range. Medium Accuracy. High Damage. Very Slow Reload. 4 ammo capacity. Vulnerable to EWS.]
[+3] Armour Penetration, [+3] Damage Output, [+3] Effective Range, [+1] Weapons Control
[-1] Rate of Fire
[-1] Armour Plating, [-1] Tech Simplicity

Oof, I am tempted. This makes me want to do a heavy drone carrier at a later date, but i don't like the weakpoint created AND the EWS for something meant to make up a battleline. It's damn nice though.
and the Atlanteans will place restrictive export controls on who we can sell to. They promise they'll find alternative clients for us - but will they keep that promise?
Aww hell naw, We ain't came this far with our design goals to change it now.


[Universal Modular Mount]
This complex system is designed to allow for the easy replacement and install of any weapon type. This is a very difficult and complex system to implement, so while it provides great flexibility, it also comes at great cost.[+2] Weapon Hardpoints, [+1] Ease of Maintenance
[-2] Tech Simplicity, [-1] Material Affordability, [-1] Build & Repair Speeds
[Any Weapon Swaps Allowed]


I want it I want it I want it I want it SOOO bad. Can we absorb the penalties? Modularity for something mass produced is amazing. We could sell it as a one platform fits all. Drone carrier, Siege crawler, Tank.
 
On a potentially more productive topic what would people be interested in seeing information about in the Tech Readout post? I'm thinking the two or three most common tanks used by second tier nations, a couple IFV/APCs, and maybe an example of a current gen top tier tank. Anything else to add to the wishlist?
Typical Orders of Battle for these second tier nations. Expected logistical support. Expected air or drone support.

[X] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[X] [Style] Spine Mounted
[X] [Style] Nose Mounted

[X] [Modularity] Simple Modular Mount
[X] [Modularity] Complex Modular Mount

[X] [Weapon] 152mm Battle Cannon (In-House Build)
[X] [Weapon] 70mm Multiple Rocket Pod Array (In-House Build)
[X] [Weapon] 148mm Rifled Cannon (Sahel Alliance)

No on the energy weapons for now. I'm not opposed to the missiles or drones, but it feels like in those cases we'd be competing with dedicated missile launchers or drone carriers, that don't need to close with the enemy and so don't pay the costs in legs we are. That's not a competition we can win.
 
Universal Modular Mount]
This complex system is designed to allow for the easy replacement and install of any weapon type. This is a very difficult and complex system to implement, so while it provides great flexibility, it also comes at great cost.[+2] Weapon Hardpoints, [+1] Ease of Maintenance
[-2] Tech Simplicity, [-1] Material Affordability, [-1] Build & Repair Speeds
[Any Weapon Swaps Allowed]
I want it I want it I want it I want it SOOO bad. Can we absorb the penalties? Modularity for something mass produced is amazing. We could sell it as a one platform fits all. Drone carrier, Siege crawler, Tank.
Right now we have a C in Logistics value, this would be a collective -4 in that area so... absolutely not. It would be cool to have, but if we wanted to do that we would need to either be working on an advanced fighter for a rich buyer, or we would have needed to skimp out on almost every other facet of the machine so we could save it all for the highest grade weapons.

Call me boring, but I want either the Cannon or the Rockets. I'd actually like the ones being made by the other company, because they work well and are cheap.
 
[X] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[X] [Style] Indirect Back Mounted

[X] [Modularity] Simple Modular Mount
[X] [Modularity] Complex Modular Mount

[X] [Weapon] 152mm Battle Cannon (In-House Build)
[X] [Weapon] 148mm Rifled Cannon (Sahel Alliance)

I am very, very tempted by the universal Modular mount, But Looking over rating I think it hurts more then it could ever help. I am ALSO tempted by the Drone deck, But the soft factors scare me away for what meant to be a mainline combat unit's primary weapon. 1 Drone, ammo capacity of 4, drone has 2 bombs. Slow reload. Those soft factors as pretty bad. at best that 8 bombs that could be perfect. But add on the fact that drone can be shot with AA, Vulnerable to ECM and such, it to finicky for the main weapon of a non-specialist vehicle.

I WILL want the external mount to pack some form of light drone though, All the factors I have stated above matter a LOT less when its a utility knife for something with a Heavy Battle cannon, Who's can now see you and wall hack you, Or flush out infantry.

Settling with the battle cannons because they are good middle of the road, and don't jack heat into the atmosphere like the laser do.

EDIT: The only real way to make the universal mount work would be the Rocket pack, Because it comes with so many logi- bonuses, which net out to ONLY -1 tech simplicity... Which then considering the Idea is to Make it Modular, Having something that Jacks up the problems into the atmosphere when you give it anything except the most basic of weaponry for the target consumer is bad. One day, A universal mook may be in reach, but it's not today.
 
Last edited:
[X] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[X] [Style] Spine Mounted

[X] [Modularity] Fully Integrated Mount
[X] [Modularity] Simple Modular Mount

[X] [Weapon] 152mm Battle Cannon (In-House Build)
[X] [Weapon] 70mm Multiple Rocket Pod Array (In-House Build)
[X] [Weapon] 148mm Rifled Cannon (Sahel Alliance)

I'm mostly choosing to try and stay close to remaining cheap and efficient. The Direct Back and Spine provides bonuses to heat management and repairs without any big penalties, I think going for the more complex mounts are risking making our product too complicated or expensive for relatively little benefit, and that's more or less the same reason I'm going with the cannons and rockets. I know that they're a bit boring, but they're also efficient. Let's save the hot rod bristling with lasers that runs a risk of melting into a pile of slag for when we get our hands on a contract to build a Supernova.
 
[X] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[X] [Style] Spine Mounted
[X] [Style] Indirect Back Mounted

[X] [Modularity] Fully Integrated Mount
[X] [Modularity] Simple Modular Mount

[X] [Weapon] 152mm Battle Cannon (In-House Build)
[X] [Weapon] 148mm Rifled Cannon (Sahel Alliance)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top