| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sleeping Dragon
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 06-Apr-2005 00:00
Posts: 4820
Location: Czech Republic
|
 Posted: 08-Dec-2016 02:09 Post subject: Armoured vehicles in CBT (non-rule musing) |
  |
|
I've been thinking a bit about how armoured vehicles would be shaped in Battletech provided that there are different threats on the field. Aside from time proven classics of tank vs. tank combat there are 10-17 m tall weapons platforms moving about (and packing tank-caliber weapons). Which in combination of combat happening at shorter distances (10 hexes is about 300 m after all) would mean that they'd have stronger top armour and perhaps weaker underside to save weight. Do you think that to make the armour a bit more effective against shots comming from above we'd seen more of pike nose shape that was once a hallmark of russian heavy tanks? And with weapons supposedly requiring taller turrets (and a bit more gun elevation, unless you want to be reduced to shooting 'Mech's knees in close combat) do you think that we'd see more vehicles looking like this?
_________________
The dragon NEVER sleeps!
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
Mordel
Mordel.Net
Administrator
Joined: 03-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 6061
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 08-Dec-2016 08:54 Post subject: Armoured vehicles in CBT (non-rule musing) |
|
|
Looks like something I'd see while watching Lost in Space!
_________________
Mordel Blacknight - Site Administrator
|
|
| Back to top |
   
|
Sleeping Dragon
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 06-Apr-2005 00:00
Posts: 4820
Location: Czech Republic
|
| Posted: 08-Dec-2016 12:51 Post subject: Armoured vehicles in CBT (non-rule musing) |
|
|
Well, prototype model work of the 50s 
Technically this is a Swedish take on scilating turret that combines angling with roof swept back when it's pointing it upward. Yes, it was brought up by WoT recently.
_________________
The dragon NEVER sleeps!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Rudel Gurken
Allisters Light Thunder
Major
Joined: 15-Jun-2005 00:00
Posts: 1456
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 10-Dec-2016 15:41 Post subject: Armoured vehicles in CBT (non-rule musing) |
|
|
I think incoming weapons fire from a mech would only be a threat for tank tops when the mech stand really close. Like in the same Hex. Even 60m away a mech would'nt hit in such a high angle.
Tanks itself are 2 to 3 meters high (nowadays)and most battle mech weapons would be in a height of maybe 2/3 of the height of the mech (6 to 8 meters).
In addition: Tanks in the 31st century would mostly compete against other tanks.
_________________
Reality is where the Pizza-man comes from!'Gucken, petzen, verpissen!' (Look at it, squeal it, get the hell away from it!) – Motto of the recon troops'Artillery doesn´t know friend or foe! They only know worthwhile targets!‘ – Kuritan Infantrist
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sleeping Dragon
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 06-Apr-2005 00:00
Posts: 4820
Location: Czech Republic
|
| Posted: 10-Dec-2016 16:25 Post subject: Armoured vehicles in CBT (non-rule musing) |
|
|
I was thinking about taller turrets and their shapes, but hitting tank tops would be a more frequent problem IMO. 'mechs are quite often seen and even at longer ranges there are massive missile batteries that usually attack from above. At least I think they would have thicker roof armour.
_________________
The dragon NEVER sleeps!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vagabond
Mercenary
Mr. Referee
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 5724
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 10-Dec-2016 17:45 Post subject: Armoured vehicles in CBT (non-rule musing) |
|
|
I think for the most part we would not see a big departure from modern tanks except as you noted with slightly thicker roof armor. Remember though, that mech armor nullifies most penetrating hits at even a thin layer.
_________________
one must work hard to cultivate the mind and body. and one must always cultivate the mind.
//^(^_^)^\\
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sleeping Dragon
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 06-Apr-2005 00:00
Posts: 4820
Location: Czech Republic
|
| Posted: 11-Dec-2016 15:57 Post subject: Armoured vehicles in CBT (non-rule musing) |
|
|
Except the tall turrets maybe as stated in one of the older TROs (was it at Von Luckner? EDIT: Patton/Rommel probably).
_________________
The dragon NEVER sleeps!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Rudel Gurken
Allisters Light Thunder
Major
Joined: 15-Jun-2005 00:00
Posts: 1456
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 12-Dec-2016 16:02 Post subject: Armoured vehicles in CBT (non-rule musing) |
|
|
The problem with incoming missiles would be the same with enemy tanks.
The Rommel/Patten tanks fluff mentioned that this tanks would only be able to hit a mechs legs if fired from a range of 90 m or less.
Something like the russian tanks nowadays with their flat turrets and a smaller elevation range.
_________________
Reality is where the Pizza-man comes from!'Gucken, petzen, verpissen!' (Look at it, squeal it, get the hell away from it!) – Motto of the recon troops'Artillery doesn´t know friend or foe! They only know worthwhile targets!‘ – Kuritan Infantrist
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sleeping Dragon
Draconis Combine
Tai-i
Joined: 06-Apr-2005 00:00
Posts: 4820
Location: Czech Republic
|
| Posted: 13-Dec-2016 00:27 Post subject: Armoured vehicles in CBT (non-rule musing) |
|
|
Sure. I was just thinking whether there would be any trends in general shaping of the tank different from now simply based on different units it encounters on the field.
_________________
The dragon NEVER sleeps!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
