| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Stinger
The Knights of Chaos
General
Joined: 30-Apr-2002 00:00
Posts: 1833
Location: United States
|
 Posted: 05-Sep-2005 03:08 Post subject: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
  |
|
Just a general question really. Do they have a place in battletech at all? And if so how much should be spent on them? I am asking because I was playing with some of the 555 ton surface ship designs. And they are interesting but ungodly expensive. But the 100 ton 5c 8f 3 ppc hyrofoil was really interesting.
[ This Message was edited by: Stinger on 2005-09-05 03:09 ]
_________________
Stinger
If it's "creepy" to use the Internet, military satellites, and robot aircraft to find a house full of gorgeous young models so I can drop in on them unexpected, then FINE, I'm "creepy". Howard Wolowitz. BBT.
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
Rudel Gurken
Allisters Light Thunder
Major
Joined: 15-Jun-2005 00:00
Posts: 1454
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 05:29 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Small boats up to 300 tons will have their use on some planets to defend positions at a coast or in a river-delta but i think no house would pack too much money in them because they are of very limited use and cannot be carried onto every battlefield.
[ This Message was edited by: Rudel Gurken on 2005-09-05 07:39 ]
_________________
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 |
|
Wanallo
Federated Suns
Leftenant Colonel
Joined: 02-Jan-2004 00:00
Posts: 671
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 07:37 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
I like them alot. Large navy battles are a speciality of mine. I once retold how we played a game with Mega Aircraft carriers (no real weight, just huge armour and a few guns) with 300 ton battleships as support. With mechs fighting on the top of the carrier. As a mobile weapons unit! Was really fun actually. Was great to see my friend panic as i scored a critical on his carrier, and started to sink it. Furiously trying to get other boats in range to jump his mechs too!
Also a level dominated by a river or lake makes a great scenario for a mech vs boat game. Really good.
_________________
Constant exposure to dangers will breed contempt for them-Seneca
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Rudel Gurken
Allisters Light Thunder
Major
Joined: 15-Jun-2005 00:00
Posts: 1454
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 07:42 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
We had a battle in a town crossed by several canals and some hydrofoils caused real havoc on my enemy!!
_________________
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 |
|
Delta
Lyran Alliance
Leutnant
Joined: 11-Dec-2004 00:00
Posts: 635
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 09:01 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
| Well, wet Navies have been replaced mainly by the black sea Navies. However, everyone needs to keep a small fleet of small craft weighing up to 400 or so tops, but mainly PTs and hydrofoils. (Unless you're on a desert planet or something)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
chihawk
Clan Blood Spirit
Master Bartender
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 8052
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 10:13 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-09-05 03:08, Stinger wrote:
Just a general question really. Do they have a place in battletech at all? And if so how much should be spent on them? I am asking because I was playing with some of the 555 ton surface ship designs. And they are interesting but ungodly expensive. But the 100 ton 5c 8f 3 ppc hyrofoil was really interesting.
|
|
You'd actually get more replies if you don't make stuff like this a poll. 
Of course they have a place, although it is extremely limited...
_________________
www.210sportsblog.com
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
Ruger
Lyran Alliance
Hauptmann General
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1921
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 11:01 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-09-05 09:01, Delta wrote:
Well, wet Navies have been replaced mainly by the black sea Navies. However, everyone needs to keep a small fleet of small craft weighing up to 400 or so tops, but mainly PTs and hydrofoils. (Unless you're on a desert planet or something)
|
|
You have seen the 60,000 ton 6/9 moving cruiser in HBHS, correct? 
Ruger
|
|
| Back to top |
|
SaberDance
Federated Suns
Colonel
Joined: 07-May-2004 00:00
Posts: 837
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 12:59 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
I'm being difficult here, of course.
On any planet with substantial bodies of water, a wet-navy will be essential. If you have one, you'll be better able to defend the planet (Viking style if no other way).
Now, as a game mechanic, navies are a gimick. I like that flat-top idea, by the way.
_________________
"Politics is the Art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, misdiagnosing the problem, and applying the wrong solution."
-Groucho Marx
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gunslinger Patch
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Major
Joined: 04-Mar-2002 00:00
Posts: 1611
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 13:11 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Is it me, or every time wet navies get discussed its all about warships?
I can see wet navies having a place, if only on well populated worlds. But not so much as warships. A warship needs money to built, maintain, and to pay the crew. And all for something that would hardly ever get to fight even during a planetary invasion. In terms of budgets, who is going to build and maintain such a naval force?
But I don't think I've seen anyone talk about the, to me, obvious wet navy job in Battletech. Landing craft.
Ships on well populated worlds used to transport conventional and mech units over water, with perhaps a small supply of craft to land them directly on a beach.
Unless you have that rare planet with opposing govts and lots of population, I just don't see much in the way of warships being bothered with.
The only decent use as in need for them I can see is as escorts for the military transport ships and landing craft that enable forces to move over water without the cost and expense of dropships. And only a few of them since how often would they have work to do?
And then, not so much for supporting an opposed landing, since how often would that happen? But I see the warships as being mainly anti-air platforms to protect the troopships from air attack when hostile forces are on world or in orbit overhead.
For that, a planet may lay in a modest supply of ICE engine ships with autocannons and LRMs and such on them. Something useful, yet not real costly.
_________________
"Those who beat their guns into plows will plow for those with guns..." -Thomas Jefferson
|
|
| Back to top |
|
AWAD
Draconis Combine
Chu-sa
Joined: 06-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 766
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 13:22 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Done the something similar in my game. The sheer terror and panic on PCs with a few breached locations. Trying to get close to land where the delta came out and had some marshy islands.
AWAD- Then came the Hydrofoils out of the Delta, they were shitting bricks
|
|
| Back to top |
|
AWAD
Draconis Combine
Chu-sa
Joined: 06-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 766
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 13:27 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Yes they are more case specific. But My feeling is in old 3025 you can justify it easily. In the new era of 3060 with new tech and factories everywhere cranking out mechs and hover vehicles it is more difficult to have a dedicated wet navy.
This is not even getting into the entire Aerospace fighter thing either.
But I think some local governements would want the jobs it creates to build ships. Also may be useful aginst acutal planetary pirates.
AWAD- Hydrofoil with an AC/20 is just wrong
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Delta
Lyran Alliance
Leutnant
Joined: 11-Dec-2004 00:00
Posts: 635
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 14:19 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Theres no denying that Wet Navies have their uses. However, for my money and men, I'd rather have an armada of hovercraft, VTOLs and fighters.
Why?
Lets see...
Hovercraft
1) Speed. You are FAST. I mean, the bottom speed of a 50 ton hovercraft is something like 7/11
2) Flanking. OK, fine. You can have bigger ships. But I will flank you and unload nasty things into your aft.
3) Versitility. We can go on land...
VTOLs
1) Speed. We can go fast if we are so designed.
2) Height. We can zip through terrain, have fun tracking my VTOLs and Hovercraft using YOUR big ships for cover.
Fighters (Conventional or Aero)
1) Speed. (Again). Fighters are exposed for one turn, in each pass they unload a lethal payload. And you can't hide from it, either.
2) Bombs. Anything over 200 tons is an instant bomb magnet...
3) Air surpiority. Any air cover you launched or is flying along side is going to be killed.
Now, if you are deploying a massive armor helled out gun loaded map sized ship, then I present myself with two options.
1) Get the hell out of its reach.
2) Fire anything naval scaled. One hit from a NL/35 won't do a ton of damage, but it will vaporize the water in the general vicinity, cauing your ship to suffer from lethal falling damage as it plummits.
(Not to mention the lethal G-forces the poor crew would be exposed to).
All of my points presented, they do have use. However, its rather impractial for houses to have anything more than 400 or so tons (transport).
I could see some minor perhiphery state use a giant surface ship as a cheaper way of defending than a couple dropships.
I dont have HBHS (I only have the FM:LA). Give me a rought rundown of its stats, Ruger.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Rudel Gurken
Allisters Light Thunder
Major
Joined: 15-Jun-2005 00:00
Posts: 1454
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 15:25 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Our first underwaterbattle (in the old level 1 times!) was a much thought of desaster!
On the one side we had a lance of SteelCrab custom-mechs (45t, 6/9, 2 SRT-6, 2 MdL, 1 SmL, almost full armor) and on the other we had 2 lances of Ammonit Strike Submarines (30t, 4/6 ICE, 3 SRT-6, 5,5t armor).
While moving to combat-range 2 of the mechs fell down, one of them breaching its right torso nearly cutting its weapons to half!
In the first combat-round 3 Subs were lost due to hull breaching! One Mech went down with a flooded cockpit and anotherone with a breached CT!
So in our first real round we lost half our Mechs and nearly half our Subs!!
Next round we lost 2 Subs and 1 Mech!!!
All due to hull breaching!!
After 5 rounds the only surviving machine was a Sub!
We agreed that all of our machines have selfsealing capabilities!!
A hull breach on a roll of 10+ means a chance of about 16% so 1 of 6 hits will lead to one!
If you play with this rules forget about lasers and PPC´s : take LRT for the range and SRT for the kill!!
_________________
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 |
|
ralgith
Blighted Sun Battalion
1st Company
"Ralgith's Renegades"
Colonel
Joined: 18-Aug-2003 00:00
Posts: 2021
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 17:46 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-09-05 03:08, Stinger wrote:
Just a general question really. Do they have a place in battletech at all? And if so how much should be spent on them? I am asking because I was playing with some of the 555 ton surface ship designs. And they are interesting but ungodly expensive. But the 100 ton 5c 8f 3 ppc hyrofoil was really interesting.
|
|
I use them, but I never pay for them. I simply assume that any "wet navy" assets are strictly based on what each planet may have available. I only spend points (when that type of game) on mechs and tanks and such. Which means I basically only use naval ships if a scenario calls for them to be on one side, the other, or both. Otherwise, I don't use them. Also, I should note I primarily use submarines, not many surface ships.
_________________
Colonel Ralgith t'Mayasara
Blighted Sun Battalion
1st Company 'Ralgith's Renegades'
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Gunslinger Patch
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Major
Joined: 04-Mar-2002 00:00
Posts: 1611
|
| Posted: 05-Sep-2005 20:15 Post subject: RE: Question for everyone on Wet Navies and what they think of them. |
|
|
Submarines are the same thing. A sub is a weapon for attacking surface ships? Whose surface ships? On just how many planets does there exist an opposing navy? And in how many oceans does a warship, with an oceangoing hull need to worry about getting shot at by a battlemech way down on the ocean floor? (and out of range very likely).
The only place I can see subs taking on mechs underwater is in shallow water. Mechs may be watertight, but by no means designed to submerge like a submarine can. So a mech could only operate in shallow water, say 100 feet or meters? How many sub skippers would take a sub into that? Since, assuming there are subs, there would also be depth charges. At such a shallow depth, an aircraft could probably see the sub, depending on the waters.
Its like battleships. Nobody has a battleship in their navy any more. Why? No need for them any more. Smaller, cheaper ships can do the jobs that need doing just as well for loads less money and crewmen. So why would any planet build a ship with serious firepower when there is no opposing navy to worry about? Why would they build submarines either?
If something were going to be built just to provide jobs, a savvy govt would build a tank or aircraft factory. Unlike submarines you can sell those to somebody. And adding such to your forces will do you a whole lot more good then building a warship or submarine would.
Patrol craft or hydrofoils, small ones, could be useful for coastal waters when after non-mech insurgents and such or for customs patrols. Or to patrol rivers. But get mechs involved and no matter how fast the boat it on the river its a sitting duck. And in coastal waters, they got to come back to port sometime and the mechs can get at the port most of the time. Or just hit the port with aircraft and blow up their munitions.
_________________
"Those who beat their guns into plows will plow for those with guns..." -Thomas Jefferson
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
