I threw in a vote for Indirect, Because I am already voting for ballistic anyway, And range is one of those statistic that in the right OP can let you absolutely BODY an enemy. It moves the Average range up to Long range cannons (I THINK), without seemingly giving penalties to actually just shooting it normally, Which put together is a very solid proposal.
It lets the Walker act as makeshift artillery support for Allied forces in the area and other prongs of the same offense with indirect fire missions because of it's range buff, That is something I would not underestimate in terms of providing support in a high activity zone.
I threw in a vote for Indirect, Because I am already voting for ballistic anyway, And range is one of those statistic that in the right OP can let you absolutely BODY an enemy. It moves the Average range up to Long range cannons (I THINK), without seemingly giving penalties to actually just shooting it normally, Which put together is a very solid proposal.
It lets the Walker act as makeshift artillery support for Allied forces in the area and other prongs of the same offense with indirect fire missions because of it's range buff, That is something I would not underestimate in terms of providing support in a high activity zone.
and even if it doesn't do that much of a boost with the current cannons a simple modular mount means people can mod towed artillery guns into something able to mount on it. a M777 155mm gun is about the same weight class as these battle cannons.
[X] [Weapon] 70mm Multiple Rocket Pod Array (In-House Build)
[X] [Weapon] Heavy Drone Dock (Worker's Union of Bharat)
Pretty obvious with these choices that I believe that the heavy weapon should be rockets or drones. Even though it doesn't quite work towards the areas that need to be improved. Gosh darn dice causing those failures.
and even if it doesn't do that much of a boost with the current cannons a simple modular mount means people can mod towed artillery guns into something able to mount on it. a M777 155mm gun is about the same weight class as these battle cannons.
If we do an external drones for the light external mount, that would mean the crawler can be both tank squadron, and have the ability to sight out its own targets with scouting drones. That's a pretty nasty all around package that forces commitment, because either it will push into you like a tank squadron, and any targets to hard to walk over can be shelled.
All in a package designed tk be cheap and easy to maintain, which means you can pull the enemy attention and resources apart. Or just have them support each other.
Not feeling rockets. Cannons gives +2 or 1 to every weapon effectiveness stat. The rockets Not only lose the buff to weapon control, but - the fire rate. In net Weapon effectiveness its +8 compared to +6, and the negative to ROF puts us in F+ because we're already E-. That Again, Makes it poor as a main line battle unit, and relegates it only to being a mediocre recreation of stalins organ on legs.
I would rather take Either of the ballistic cannons, which are a pretty snazzy deal even without + range from Indirect mounting, and the 148mm ensures we have at minimum 1 guaranteed customer.
The ballistics are basically standalone good, Almost independently from whatever Mount it in, so its guaranteed to be fine with whatever wins. Spine? Just fine, Indirect? Perfect, Back mounted? No problamo.
Not feeling rockets. Cannons gives +2 or 1 to every weapon effectiveness stat. The rockets Not only lose the buff to weapon control, but - the fire rate. In net Weapon effectiveness its +8 compared to +6, and the negative to ROF puts us in F+ because we're already E-. That Again, Makes it poor as a main line battle unit, and relegates it only to being a mediocre recreation of stalins organ on legs.
[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
The only cost is in rate of fire and the Indirect Mounting increases the range to long range. The increases to Ease of Maintenance, Build & Repair Speeds, Material Affordability, and Tech Simplicity are quite potent benefits. It is also on the higher end for damage output, and rate of fire can be increased with the turret.
Mounts:
what to pick depends heavily on what weapon we want.
though it mostly comes out between Direct Back mounted, Indirect back mounted, or Spine mounted.
Nose mounted applies a penlity to future roles for internals, which is not worth it just for better aim and protection, unless we want to save on weight.
Belly mounted as ease of mantince which might be good, but the worse aim just kills the weapon. also incompatable with drones which sucks, as releasing them from underneath us would be the best location protection wise, not haveing to worry about a lucky shot. (no factory Strider for us)
-----
mount costomization again, depends on what weapon we want in the end.
If it's Drones, we want the Fully intergrated, as we have no need to swap out whats built. We'll be swapping out the individual drones instead, and the docking equipment will mostly be the same. May the the SMM if the GM says otherwise.
Simple modular mount(SMM) is likely what we want for everythign else, as it offers the costomers choices, while not decreasing Tech Simplicity.
Complex Modular mount(CMM) is inbetween SMM and UMM, and has the disatvantages of both. only time we might want it is if were going for Rockets or Missles, but even then UMM is most likely to be the better choice as the penelties are not that much more and it gives A LOT more in options then the CMM dose.
Universal Modulat Mount(UMM) if we dont care about tech simplicity, UMM is what we want. It vastly expands the potintial for our mech, and the costomer can arme them however they want.
----
Weapon systems:
152mm Battle cannon /148mm Rifled Cannon
Same stats, except the 152mm is easier to maintain, and 148mm is cheaper.
both are very good options, but I'm slightly favoring the 148mm of the two, because it locks in a buyer, and could make the mech cheaper. it's also slightly lighter, se we could get more armor.
70mm rockets: yhea, no. might be suitable for the turrent or external mount, but not the main weapon. next.
StoG Missile. Decent, but the restrictions cost us a costomer. they will get us anotehr one, but still. good long range option, and somethign to consider.
High energy Laser. meh? the Two cannons seem to be better, offering more, with the only thing this has is lack of ammo and slightly mrore accureacy?
Charged Partical Weapon: maybe? system looks to be to unrilaiable to be built enmass, and if we do take it were going to want a CMM or UMM mount, so our buyers can swap it out later for a better version, or another weapon if it never gose anywhere.
Heavy Drone Dock: this is garbage. One Drone, that takes forever to rearm. This is better used as it is now, from Trucks and Aircraft Facilites. Not a mecha. We don't want a lone Drone Bomber. we want small, cheap, dispsable recon drones with a decent warhead/payload, that we can deploy by the dozens. use them as a directed remote piloted munition tha hard to see.
---
I'm suggestiong
[X] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[X] [Modularity] Simple Modular Mount
[X] [Modularity] Universal Modular Mount
[X] [Weapon] 148mm Rifled Cannon (Sahel Alliance)
[X] [Weapon] 152mm Battle Cannon (In-House Build)
The two cannons are the only things that are worth using as the core weapons. rockets and drone are trash, Laser and partical are meh, and Missle comes with to much baggage.
Mounts are SMM or UMM. eather the basic modularity, or all in and dang the costs.
Direct back mounted fits the Cannons the best.
I've been running the numbers and am pretty happy with where we are. The engines in a following step should help with power control, and subsystems also have promise. My observations on items with no votes seem pointless right now so I'll save myself the time and not type them all up. I'm sure no one is surprised that I feel the cannons are the better option. The rocket battery feels to me more like what I'd want on a different vehicle or as a secondary weapon ala the Sherman Calliope.
If we wanted the Rockets, I'd suggest the complex modular mount so that the missiles could be switched in. For the cannons I've settled on limited flexibility sounds perfect for our market. Don't like our 152mm gun and want to use your locally built 148mm? Go for it.
Direct back mounted seems like it's probably the best overall, but I do like the idea of the better range and indirect fire capabilities of the Indirect mount. I'll vote for both but the Direct mount seems to have a clear lead.
Overall I feel the in-house 152mm is the better gun, but I'd not complain about the 148mm was selected instead.
Direct/Simple/152mm or 148mm give the following modifiers -
[+2] Heat Management, [+2] Build & Repair Speed [+1] Ease of Maintenance ,
[+1] Ease of Maintenance for the 152mm or [+1] Material Affordability for the 148mm
Material Affordability is currently pretty good. I'd like a bit more room for when the armour comes up, but EoM is probably more important overall. The half ton weight difference in exchange for more versatile ammo is a coin flip for me. I am going to want to put in another ton or so of ammo either way, just to give this thing some more combat endurance. From the historical documents I'm familiar with having more ammo is pretty important.
[X] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[X] [Style] Indirect Back Mounted
[X] [Modularity] Simple Modular Mount
[X] [Weapon] 152mm Battle Cannon (In-House Build)
Removed vote for the 148. Only the two cannons have a chance of winning and I like the in house weapon better.
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.
With the simple modular mount well ahead of the other options, and the two cannons being almost tied it occurs to me that we can simply offer both options for sale. I assume that if our in-house 152 wins then the Sahel alliance won't autobuy. It seems reasonable that they are counting on the additional overseas sales rather than simply equipping their own forces.
Use the half ton that the 148 saves for extra ammo. Then people can choose between the cheaper with a bit more ammo or the slightly larger and more flexible gun that is easier to maintain.
I could see either offering the 148 as a factory option, or selling the base hull without the 152 and letting the customer install their own locally produced weapon.
I don't want to try to double dip, but even if it gives absolutely zero mechanical benefit the possibility does seem flavorful.
If the 148 wins I'm assuming our engineering department won't bother creating the 152.
[X] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[X] [Style] Nose Mounted
[X] [Style] Spine Mounted
[X] [Modularity] Complex Modular Mount
[X] [Weapon] 152mm Battle Cannon (In-House Build)
If we're actually trying to sell this Mech to as many people as possible, Complex MM is the only acceptable choice - it is insanely useful to customers to be able to flat out ignore an entire portion of the Mech construction process and replace it with what they want, either by speed building it without the gun or by using their own production lines later.
Being able to turn one of the most expensive and vital parts of a Mech into an aftermarket kit - I don't have the words for how important that is.
As for guns, ballistic cannons are among the most ubiquitos in the world, a cheap and effective in-house design is great for future business, and that +2 armor pen + damage is great for the stated requirement of anti armor work.
Mounting I'm flexible on, though I would prefer Nose because of the Weapon Control, and the penalty doesn't actually mean much because we're trying to keep this cheap so we aren't loading it up with lots of components anyway.
So this is the final score for 152 + Complex MM - fantastic damage output and Anti armor capability, net neutral on logistics.
[+2] Armour Penetration
[+2] Damage Output
[+2] Effective Range
[+1] Rate of Fire
[+1] Weapons Control
[+1] Heat Management
[+1] Weapon Hardpoints
[+1] Build & Repair Speeds
[+1] Ease of Maintenance
[-1] Tech Simplicity
[-1] Material Affordability
[X] [Style] Direct Back Mounted
[X] [Style] Indirect Back Mounted
[X] [Style] Spine Mounted
[X] [Modularity] Complex Modular Mount
[X] [Weapon] 152mm Battle Cannon (In-House Build)
Like others have said, I'm wary of taking a lot of penalties this late in the process. With the exception of Complex Modular Mount because of how much versatility it would add.
I like the idea of putting a drone or missiles on the rear mount and some point-defence on the front mount.
Love the drawing of the hull! For some reason I'd been picturing it as a four-legged spider...
Update: removed 148mm cannon 'cause a Heat Management+ thing is going to win and I'm figuring we can secure the Sahel contract
I actually do think a missile artillery Loadout is a good idea... Just not this generation of mech.
It's too new and crude, once we're better mech designers we can come back to this and make a MK2 multirole version with a missile system that's not as crude as the rockets and doesn't piss off a customer like the Atlantean missiles do.
