Big Guns made Realistic

[tbeard1999]

Yeah, I've often figured grav tanks would be a radically different shape from current designs, especially considering (unless it's a ground-hugger) one of the greatest threat angles would be from below.

I've always assumed -- and my miniature game designs have always assumed -- that standard tactical mode for grav vehicles is nap of the earth (i.e., only a few meters off the ground). "High mode" is the equivalent of march formation and would only be in safe areas such as rear areas (or during periods of extreme desperation).

In such an environment, grav tanks will face most threats from the front, like current MBTs. Of course, just like current MBTs, tactical surprises, mistakes or desperation can result in bad guys getting flank shots.

And while shapes can change, surface area is relatively inelastic. Though I agree that wedge shapes -- at least on the upper deck -- make a lot of sense in an environment that has top attack missiles. And the great the arc protected, the heavier the armor. Nothing will change that. And unless armor protection *dramatically* outpaces weapon effectiveness, tanks will always have to prioritize their armor packages (i.e., heavily armor the arcs most likely to be attacked and scrimp elsewhere). Just like 20-21st tanks have had to.

Oh and a couple of observations about sloping armor:

1. These days, the main advantage of sloped armor is that you can get away with thinner plates (which are disproportionately cheaper to mill). Actual mass doesn't change between (say) a vertical plate and a sloped plate with the same LOS thickness.

2. Modern APFSDS rounds are actually designed to turn into a sloped plate so the sloped plates are actually less effective than vertical plates vs KE rounds.

 

[aramis]

Thing is that high-mode operates much like high-speed helos (some canon grav tanks make mach 0.8, vs the about 0.5 limit for helos), and the line between grav tanks and grav air-to-air fighters is blurry.

I've often had PC's who weren't trusted escorted down by a grav-cav squadron, for example. Still, generally, optimization of armor makes sense, tho not as radically, since these are true VTOL/OmniDirectionalFlight craft. A Trepida is as much an Armored Apache as it is a tank with 0 ground pressure.

 

[CosmicGamer]

I'm no expert on weapons, armor, or gravity, but if you take a typical tank and make it a 'grav' tank where the grav portion is not for lift but just to counter the weight of armor...

Have fun with it.

 

[mbrinkhues]

Makes little sense IMHO unless you have very limited Grav- or Powertech. Or you want to build a BOLO(1) That way you keep the tracks and thats an object that must be relatively light/lighty armored and therefor is a prime target. M(obility) kills remove a tank from the current battle as good as total ones. And ground pressure makes mine-construction easier (simple TL5+ pressure mines) than a flying tank (TL7+ sensor mines at least).

Crossing trenches/obstacles is another point where Grav helps (Ironically many WWI tanks where better at crossing obstacles/trenches than the WW 2 ones) Physical contact limits you to a certain percentage of vehicle length for crossing abilities.

And while not game-useabel there is also a length:width ratio that you should not cross (As the Brits learned) before a tracklayer becomes unwieldabel.

(1) I want to state here that I like BOLO's. I consider BOLO's great. Long live the Dinochrome Brigade! Could somebody please tell the Mark XXX Magnificent that I meant no offence to him? Please?

 

[tbeard1999]

Thing is that high-mode operates much like high-speed helos (some canon grav tanks make mach 0.8, vs the about 0.5 limit for helos), and the line between grav tanks and grav air-to-air fighters is blurry.

I've often had PC's who weren't trusted escorted down by a grav-cav squadron, for example. Still, generally, optimization of armor makes sense, tho not as radically, since these are true VTOL/OmniDirectionalFlight craft. A Trepida is as much an Armored Apache as it is a tank with 0 ground pressure.

Agreed. But I'd add "with the ability to fly, at the cost of being *much* easier to shoot down..."

While the movement modes are similar, an Apache cannot carry MBT class armor (or even APC class armor). Indeed, Apaches -- which are among the best armored gunships -- have been highly vulnerable to small arms fire (from a "mission kill" standpoint; they are actually pretty survivable).

This seriously limits the tactical options available to the Apache and defines helicopter tactics as essentially ambush, hit and run, engage at ranges > than target's ability to shoot back, etc. A grav tank would not have to limit itself so.

 

[tbeard1999]

(1) I want to state here that I like BOLO's. I consider BOLO's great. Long live the Dinochrome Brigade! Could somebody please tell the Mark XXX Magnificent that I meant no offence to him? Please?

"For the honor of the Regiment..."

 

[aramis]

Re Bolos: I prefer Papal States Ogres, myself, but don't mind Bolos...

Re: Grav Tanks
yeah, the grav tank is a really odd hyrbid... mobility of a helo, speed of a fixed wing, armor of a light skirmish tank, armament of a light MBT. Price of a small ship.

Under MT, a trepida can shoot down most civilian ships.

 

[mbrinkhues]

Re Bolos: I prefer Papal States Ogres, myself, but don't mind Bolos...

Re: Grav Tanks
yeah, the grav tank is a really odd hyrbid... mobility of a helo, speed of a fixed wing, armor of a light skirmish tank, armament of a light MBT. Price of a small ship.

Under MT, a trepida can shoot down most civilian ships.

Same in TNE. IIRC both games, even more so TNE states that the armor on a civie is basically micro-meteroid protection so the Grav-equivalent of a Boringpard IIA6 should punch holes in it.

 

[tbeard1999]

Same in TNE. IIRC both games, even more so TNE states that the armor on a civie is basically micro-meteroid protection so the Grav-equivalent of a Boringpard IIA6 should punch holes in it.

Assuming the Trepida has a Z fusion gun, it can damage starships in Striker. In fact, it can utterly maul an unarmored ship and can cripple a lightly armored one. You use the ship's Striker armor + 6 as a positive DM on the High Guard surface hit table, with the weapon's Striker penetration as a negative DM. At effective range, the Z fusion gun has a penetration of 79. Since an unarmored ship is armor factor 40, this is an automatic critical hit.

It can even damage a HG armor factor 15 ship (Striker armor 85) about half the time if it scores a hit.