Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I view mech pilots in the same way I do aircraft pilots compared to tank commanders/crew.

Much more selective training and recruitment process, responsible for much more expensive and high tech kit. Both professionals, both well trained, but both in different classes.

SilverMK2 wrote:I view mech pilots in the same way I do aircraft pilots compared to tank commanders/crew.

Much more selective training and recruitment process, responsible for much more expensive and high tech kit. Both professionals, both well trained, but both in different classes.

See, but here's where it gets fuzzy.

In most Western styled 'mech' systems, the pilots of battle-mechs have a background as being tank commanders first. Some were infantrymen who were shifted over into the more 'elite' powered infantry systems like the Elementals/Battlesuits, but most have a background as tanks first then mechs.

And well, it makes a kind of sense. The two share similar roles, similar ideas, etc. So why not take the top say 10% and put them in a giant walking avatar of war?

Kanluwen wrote:And well, it makes a kind of sense. The two share similar roles, similar ideas, etc. So why not take the top say 10% and put them in a giant walking avatar of war?

I see where you are coming from, but I'm not saying they come from completely different branches, more that mech pilots are that top x% - as you suggested.

You should have said that then, you narf!

The way you worded it with "aircraft crew" made it seem like you were going in a totally different direction!

Ooh.

Or you could have used the example of "a forward observer" and "that twit who stole your fething artillery designator and started firing!"

I think we need to back up. If your comparing some sort of realistic tank vs. mech you can't say because battlemech does such and such it has to be such and such. It has to be apples to apples.
Same crews
Same money
Same tech level

Yes, I agree.

But even then we also have to indicate terrain, supporting forces, etc. And I reaaaaaally don't want to get into a simulation type discussion.

No I ok with that, but things have to be equal. We can't assume the mech pilots have Baron Richtofen, unless the tankers have Guderian.

In essence, as far as battletech goes, tanks are very defensively used and Battlemechs are very offensive in nature, being fast and maneuverable, they benefit from close range, high power weapons the most (along with that annoying hovertank that has the setting's heaviest autocannon and practically no armor, incredible ambush unit that)

What keeps them from being targetted by missiles from several miles away?

Frazzled wrote:No I ok with that, but things have to be equal. We can't assume the mech pilots have Baron Richtofen, unless the tankers have Guderian.

...

You are aware that Guderian wasn't actually that good of a tank commander, and was more of a strategist right?

Basically:

You're going to have a hard time comparing generic 'mechs' to 'tanks' without actually getting into specifics.

I.e. Scout mechs aren't going to be anywhere near as 'good' overall as a battle tank would be.

Speaking in generalities: Tanks, when fielded en masse and crewed with 'average' individuals, are going to be far more useful than a single mech of the same general loadouts piloted by an 'average' bloke would be.

But that's not how it would work out in most cases. Mech pilots would be, frankly, more like the Sentinel pilots of the Imperial Guard. They're granted a measure of latitude and freedom due to their skill and the mobility/versatility of their vehicle that the armour crews aren't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:What keeps them from being targetted by missiles from several miles away?

ECM 'spoofing', light mechs on the outskirts of the main force effectively shutting down enemy missile batteries, etc.

For battlemechs, using terrain, fast attacks, and ECM suites. For the tanks, camoflage and using their obvious advantage in having a smaller profile.

But even that isn't necessarily enough sometimes obviously. As noted, the most powerful weapons in the setting (aside from naval bombardment, which can destroy entire cities at a time such as what happened in the Turtle Bay incident during the Clan Invasion, as well as Operation Serpent on Huntess) are the Arrow IV and Long Tom artillery weapons. The former is a homing missile, which when guided (usually by a NARC beacon or a TAG system, which is shot or painted onto the target 'mech and is small enough to be carried by powered armor or an infantry team) is pretty much instant death to whichever battlemech it hits. The latter is more traditional artillery and just as deadly, but cheaper.

Oh how I love powered armor.

The Grey Death Legion are fantastic, and the Grey Death 'Recon' suit is a pinnacle of awesome.

Oh yes. I also enjoy the Kurita powered suits as well, and their weird mix of high technology and samurai ethics.

And in the case of fighting against the clans, it worked, because even if a needle gun wasn't enough to kill an elemental, cutting off the guy's head with a vibro-katana was more than enough.

Mecha 4 life! lol

In all honesty, artillery is the God of War. It's cheaper than tanks or mecha, nad as long as you keep your enemy far away, you will bombard them into dust sooner or later. With the new homing submunitions underdevelopment, even tanks will be extraordinarily vulnerable to artillery.

So while you guys are over there pitting tanks against mechs, I'll be hanging out 20 miles away with a dozen 155s. Fire for effect.

ChrisWWII wrote:In all honesty, artillery is the God of War. It's cheaper than tanks or mecha, nad as long as you keep your enemy far away, you will bombard them into dust sooner or later. With the new homing submunitions underdevelopment, even tanks will be extraordinarily vulnerable to artillery.

So while you guys are over there pitting tanks against mechs, I'll be hanging out 20 miles away with a dozen 155s. Fire for effect.

Check, and mate. I have running artillery.

'Mechs, not Mecha. I prefer the grittier, "walking tank" style of Battletech over the more fluid and silliness Gundams do.

But they will never be practical on a battlefield.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:What keeps them from being targetted by missiles from several miles away?

Nothing, other than when the rules were created they didn't make cruise missile-like objects.

Nowadays, the mobility of a 'Mech in Battletech is it's greatest defense against something like that. Cruise missiles and artillery don't turn particularly well, and a 'Mech moving 80+ KPH can be in a far different place when that attack hits.

Kanluwen wrote:

Frazzled wrote:No I ok with that, but things have to be equal. We can't assume the mech pilots have Baron Richtofen, unless the tankers have Guderian.

...

You are aware that Guderian wasn't actually that good of a tank commander, and was more of a strategist right?

Basically:

You're going to have a hard time comparing generic 'mechs' to 'tanks' without actually getting into specifics.

I.e. Scout mechs aren't going to be anywhere near as 'good' overall as a battle tank would be.

Speaking in generalities: Tanks, when fielded en masse and crewed with 'average' individuals, are going to be far more useful than a single mech of the same general loadouts piloted by an 'average' bloke would be.

But that's not how it would work out in most cases. Mech pilots would be, frankly, more like the Sentinel pilots of the Imperial Guard. They're granted a measure of latitude and freedom due to their skill and the mobility/versatility of their vehicle that the armour crews aren't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:What keeps them from being targetted by missiles from several miles away?

ECM 'spoofing', light mechs on the outskirts of the main force effectively shutting down enemy missile batteries, etc.

Ah handwavum... got it. The difficulty again is you're talking battletech and assumptions from such. If I use assumptions that your mecha are just Zentraedi battlepods then expert scouts with great latitude goes right out the window.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ChrisWWII wrote:In all honesty, artillery is the God of War. It's cheaper than tanks or mecha, nad as long as you keep your enemy far away, you will bombard them into dust sooner or later. With the new homing submunitions underdevelopment, even tanks will be extraordinarily vulnerable to artillery.

So while you guys are over there pitting tanks against mechs, I'll be hanging out 20 miles away with a dozen 155s. Fire for effect.

i'd prefer to be the guy on another continent launching missiles myself

Yes, because 'spoofing' and 'ecm' are handwavium.

Never mind that the Wild Weasel variant of the F-4 Phantom was doing it in Vietnam.

Or the B-1 had a variant doing the same...

Mechs are cool, tanks are cool, artillery and missiles are cool...where's the love for land battleships?

Kanluwen wrote:Yes, because 'spoofing' and 'ecm' are handwavium.

Never mind that the Wild Weasel variant of the F-4 Phantom was doing it in Vietnam.

Or the B-1 had a variant doing the same...

And planes still get blown out of the sky from 200 miles away. So? Its a convenient excuse to cover a glaring problem.
So we're back to direct fire evidently. If so the tank wins it hands down. The tank can see the mech before the mech can see the tank. An Eldar super heavy er..hovertank yea hovertank will pop up from behinfd a building and smear your mech thats stuck in the swamp all over the street.

The Dreadnote wrote:Mechs are cool, tanks are cool, artillery and missiles are cool...where's the love for land battleships?

Does Ogre count as a tank or a land battleship?

The Dreadnote wrote:Mechs are cool, tanks are cool, artillery and missiles are cool...where's the love for land battleships?

reverse aircraft carrier?

Now that I like.

It even has sharks (next to the catalina)

I would give all of my income to taxes if we got one of those out of it.

FM Ninja 048 wrote:It even has sharks (next to the catalina)

Thats for antiaircaft.

I handily support any budget cuts if all the extra money goes to making the reverse aircraft carrier. That or the Dragon Tank.

halonachos wrote:

Where this fails is that the design in that game has the tank never missing and the Mech standing stock still...

The bias is obvious, even to a blind man.