Ironheart tanks

[Jerell]

I'm wondering with all the stuff to choose for in Rifts if anyone's ever made extensive use of the Ironheart tanks? Before I mobilized for Iraq, I was running a rifts mercenary campaign, and our merc company was based around two platoons of IH tanks, but we had 2 players with airborne powerarmor, and a good mix of other things. A psionic, a psi-slinger, a were-wolf... ect

I got to be the squad leader for the campaign, and we got to take out some banditos for our first mission. After RPing all the intell gathering, we made a plan to take them down. We made a plan to take them down, I even wrote a real OP Order for it, and briefed it... We assaulted them at night with the tank me as TC a PC as gunner and an NPC driver, 2 PCs in power armor and the other 4 players went on foot as a kind of infantry fire team.

I never thought the IH tanks were all that great, until this battle. With the right tactics and implamentation and support, it seems these things can be real monsters. Those HEAT rounds turned out to be especially devestating. I'll say this, I'm now a firm believer in the IH tanks and combined arms tactics in Rifts. It makes me wonder if there's any other vehicles that might turn out to be uberly useful, especially for their price, that I've over looked...

I suppose I should mention we did change the size of the IH tanks for what was listed in the book. I don't know if it was really supposed to be as big as my 2 story house, but the GM cut it down to just a little bigger than a Challenger 2 MBT... It seemed much more fitting that way.

[glitterboy2098]

does the Cavalry Squadron mercenary unit i made for fun count?
14 Iron Hammer tanks
14 Iron Maiden IFV's
3 Iron Bolt MLRS
3 GAW light helicopters for scouting.

each IFV had a squad equipped with L-20's, Urban warrior armor, and grenades. the heavy weapons teams with a MG style railgun or a mini-missile launcher, wearing Gladius exoskeletons.

never got to use them, but i have them if i do get a chance. i later cut it down to a few rag tag survivors (about 3 tanks, 2 IFV, and a MLRS) for the Nexus nine mercenary unit over at the website of the same name

[taalismn]

Don't underestimate tanks...but don't rule out robots either...
As you said...combined arms operations rock!

[Aramanthus]

I always like the idea of combined arms. And I do use it in my games. And it's always fun to watch the PCs when the the fecese hits rotary equipment.

[Lenwen]

Never underestimate MDC calibre weaponry period Also dont know if you guys know this or not but Iron Heart as of WB-11 has stopped manufactering what was printed in the original merc book .. Because the CS has effectivly taken over the entire independant kingdom of New Kenora . IHA has now been retooled to mass produce the CS tanks an armored vehicles ..

juss a bite of food for thought ...

-Lenwen.

[Lenwen]

No idea it really does not give an exact Percentage of which style of weapon systems they use i.e. robots , tanks , APC's ..

It is known they developed no less then two completly different style of tanks in WB 11 tho . One Hover and one Tread style .


-Lenwen.

[Dead Boy]

Doesn't the CS use mainly robot vehicles? I would consider the Spider-Skull Walker a kind of tank.

As right you should make that presumption. As of the the very first Rifts book the SSW was the Coalition's premier heavy armor that could dish out damage like no one's business. And it only made sense to use a combination of SSWs and Sams in any mechanized assault.

Fast forward to what CWC offered and the options widened drastically. Though it may look goofy, the CTX-50 Linebacker is one serious contender and ideal for fast blitzkrieg attacks. Toss on close air support from a number of Super Sams and Warbirds, and there's no stopping them... period!

If you're willing to slow it down under 100mph, in addition to the numerous robot vehicles suitable for heavy armor, conventional land forces can be included, including the land based power armors (Terror Trooper & BGK) and troops keeping up with the use of Mark V and Mark VII APCs.

[Dustin Fireblade]

Fast forward to what CWC offered and the options widened drastically. Though it may look goofy, the CTX-50 Linebacker is one serious contender and ideal for fast blitzkrieg attacks. Toss on close air support from a number of Super Sams and Warbirds, and there's no stopping them... period!

Agreed. The Linebacker tank is the best combat vehicle in the CS aresenal IMO.

[Rallan]

Personally I think the various Iron Heart tanks need to have their stats seriously beefed up (ditto with virtually every other MDC tank in the game). Logically, if a tank and a giant robot are both armored with pretty much the same sort of mega-damage materials, the tank should end up with far more MDC than a similar-sized robot, because the amount of armor you can slap on a humanoid robot is gonna be far more limited. Robots have a high centre of gravity, a narrow body, (comparitively) thin and flimsy limbs, they need to be well balanced so they can walk around without having to worry about accidentally capsizing, and a large chunk of their profile is gonna be almost vertical. Tanks are nice and simple. You've got a low, beefy body, with plenty of room to slap armor plating on, and the profile it presents is gonna have nice sloped angles that are better for shrugging off explosives. You're also gonna be able to give a tank a lot more horsepower to actually haul its weight around with, since you can drop a big ol' engine in the middle of it instead of having to fiddle about with the complexities of providing power to articulated limbs.

End result? Tanks in Rifts should be armoured juggernauts compared to robots. They might not be able to putter around in as many kinds of terrain (I can't see a tank having an easy time picking moving through thoroughly broken terrain at anything faster than a crawl, or picking its way through dense woodland), but out on the road or in wide open spaces a tank should be able to go up against robots of similar weight and win every time.

But with the current stats? I wouldn't bother using a tank in Rifts unless I had a character who wanted to buy some serious firepower and couldn't afford a robot.

[rat_bastard]

this strikes mee as an idea rifts tank.

[Dustin Fireblade]

Personally I think the various Iron Heart tanks need to have their stats seriously beefed up (ditto with virtually every other MDC tank in the game). Logically, if a tank and a giant robot are both armored with pretty much the same sort of mega-damage materials, the tank should end up with far more MDC than a similar-sized robot, because the amount of armor you can slap on a humanoid robot is gonna be far more limited.

But with the current stats? I wouldn't bother using a tank in Rifts unless I had a character who wanted to buy some serious firepower and couldn't afford a robot.

While I see your point about the amount of armor, I think the MDC totals are fine as is. What I'd much rather see is more realistic damage from the main gun of a tank.

[Dustin Fireblade]

That picture makes me think of some f the stuff I bought for the Wizkids version of MechWarrior

The Mechwarrior Dark Age stuff? My kids are into that. (not saying you're a kid or its a kid game.)

Anyway I've really grown to not like the artwork for just about all the vehicles and robots in CWC. They look like something rejected from the 1980's GI Joe toy line.

[taalismn]

That picture makes me think of some f the stuff I bought for the Wizkids version of MechWarrior

I'm thinking that ideally you want something like the multi-turreted tanks of the interWar period...they were deemed impractical and rightfully so cumbersome, but with the need to deal with hordes(or PACKS) of enemy, often with superior mobility), tanks would do well to sport combat multiplier systems, extra high speed traversing turrets, dual-purpose reactive armor, or other defensive mechanisms like electrified hulls(that's probably more practical as a TechnoWizard creation)...

[Aramanthus]

That is a great tank Rat_Bastard. I've been using his material for years now. Of course Taalismn provided the beautiful pics for KItsune's. I know the Iron Heart is gone, but I thought it was mentioned in the sourcebook 4 The Coalition navy that some of the designers from Iron Heart had gotten away with the plans. Therefore they might be able to set up again if someone helped them. I know in my game they have begun putting their materials out for use.

[Aramanthus]

Sounds cool! They could easily be used in your own games when using minatures.

[Jerell]

I actually thought the IH tanks were stated out pretty well. Armor and offense wise.

That picture makes me think of some f the stuff I bought for the Wizkids version of MechWarrior

I'm thinking that ideally you want something like the multi-turreted tanks of the interWar period...they were deemed impractical and rightfully so cumbersome, but with the need to deal with hordes(or PACKS) of enemy, often with superior mobility), tanks would do well to sport combat multiplier systems, extra high speed traversing turrets, dual-purpose reactive armor, or other defensive mechanisms like electrified hulls(that's probably more practical as a TechnoWizard creation)...

I do caution the use of reactive armor, if you plan on working with infantry. I myself am not a fan of multi turreted vehicles, especially those pre WW2 Soviet designs, or the "May West" version of the Stuart. I'm all for the rest though! I suddenly feel like running my rifts tanker again.

[Shades of Eternity]

got links?

[Aramanthus]

I'd like to see the links you mentioned.

[Aramanthus]

Yeah the british were the first to develope them in WW1. Then the French and the Germans finally had them They were very slow and ponderous at first.

[Aramanthus]

It was the marriage of several things that existed to create the tank. Weaponology covered that subject pretty well.

[Aramanthus]

Yep! And it couldn't be anyother way. They needed that to break that stalemate in the trenches.

[Aramanthus]

I know. I'm glad my grandfather never had any hit his position. If he did he had his gas mask. It would have been a very scary thing watching those yelloww clouds floating towards your lines.

[Aramanthus]

But those rules of warfare are still worked around. Aiming a 50 calibur machine gun at his canteen on his belt. "I wasn't aiming at him."

[Jerell]

But those rules of warfare are still worked around. Aiming a 50 calibur machine gun at his canteen on his belt. "I wasn't aiming at him."

Let me put a stop to that myth right now. I don't know who started that, but exactly where in the Geneva Convention does it say you can't shoot anyone with a .50 cal? It doesn't. In fact, you can still engadge 'crunchies' or dismounts with a 120 mike mike HEAT round if you want to. There is nothing against it in the Geneva Convention I can assure you. You can call in air strikes or 155 artillerty on the same guys too. As long as they are enemy combatants Geneva is fine with everything I listed above. Take the word of this NCO on this one, and you may quote me on this.



I think people somehow read too far into the Hague Conventions where it talks about the banning of hollow tipped bullets. That's my only explaination... I don't know where this .50 cal rumor got started, but it needs to stop. Read Geneva, and be opened to the truth.

We find weapon caches here every week. Sometimes they do contain a few chemical weapons, but in the last year, I've heard of no MAJOR find of NBC weapons.

Few weapons we have inspire more fear in our enemies than the Apache helicopter and the Abrams MBT. If you ever see them in action, you'll know why. They are brutes, engines of destruction.

[Armorlord]

But those rules of warfare are still worked around. Aiming a 50 calibur machine gun at his canteen on his belt. "I wasn't aiming at him."

Let me put a stop to that myth right now. I don't know who started that, but exactly where in the Geneva Convention does it say you can't shoot anyone with a .50 cal? It doesn't. In fact, you can still engadge 'crunchies' or dismounts with a 120 mike mike HEAT round if you want to. There is nothing against it in the Geneva Convention I can assure you. You can call in air strikes or 155 artillerty on the same guys too. As long as they are enemy combatants Geneva is fine with everything I listed above. Take the word of this NCO on this one, and you may quote me on this.



I think people somehow read too far into the Hague Conventions where it talks about the banning of hollow tipped bullets. That's my only explaination... I don't know where this .50 cal rumor got started, but it needs to stop. Read Geneva, and be opened to the truth.

We find weapon caches here every week. Sometimes they do contain a few chemical weapons, but in the last year, I've heard of no MAJOR find of NBC weapons.

Few weapons we have inspire more fear in our enemies than the Apache helicopter and the Abrams MBT. If you ever see them in action, you'll know why. They are brutes, engines of destruction.

Mainly it has something to do with the .50 Raufoss rounds and the St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868. The US wasn't a part of that and considers it suitable for use on all targets. International Committee of the Red Cross tries to object to it's use using the St. Petersburg Declaration, but it was only signed by European powers considered 'Great Powers' at the time and only applied to conflicts between each other. Today most of them either don't have Raufoss, cite that the rounds normally go straight through unarmored targets before igniting and exploding, or cite that they only use them on armored targets.

[Rallan]

Personally I think the various Iron Heart tanks need to have their stats seriously beefed up (ditto with virtually every other MDC tank in the game). Logically, if a tank and a giant robot are both armored with pretty much the same sort of mega-damage materials, the tank should end up with far more MDC than a similar-sized robot, because the amount of armor you can slap on a humanoid robot is gonna be far more limited.

But with the current stats? I wouldn't bother using a tank in Rifts unless I had a character who wanted to buy some serious firepower and couldn't afford a robot.

While I see your point about the amount of armor, I think the MDC totals are fine as is. What I'd much rather see is more realistic damage from the main gun of a tank.

Yeah, but trying to decide what counts as "realistic" damage in Rifts is a bit tricky. Both the armor and weapons of fighting vehicles in Rifts are lightyears ahead of anything in the modern world, using pseudoscience that never gets properly explained (exactly what are the mysterious "alloys and ceramics" used in MDC armor plating? and how much energy is being thrown out by a blast from a typical energy weapon?). And that means that we don't have a yardstick to measure what sort of performance is and isn't realistic when you're shooting mega-damage weapons at mega-damage targets.

[glitterboy2098]

But those rules of warfare are still worked around. Aiming a 50 calibur machine gun at his canteen on his belt. "I wasn't aiming at him."

Let me put a stop to that myth right now. I don't know who started that, but exactly where in the Geneva Convention does it say you can't shoot anyone with a .50 cal? It doesn't. In fact, you can still engadge 'crunchies' or dismounts with a 120 mike mike HEAT round if you want to. There is nothing against it in the Geneva Convention I can assure you. You can call in air strikes or 155 artillerty on the same guys too. As long as they are enemy combatants Geneva is fine with everything I listed above. Take the word of this NCO on this one, and you may quote me on this.



I think people somehow read too far into the Hague Conventions where it talks about the banning of hollow tipped bullets. That's my only explaination... I don't know where this .50 cal rumor got started, but it needs to stop. Read Geneva, and be opened to the truth.

We find weapon caches here every week. Sometimes they do contain a few chemical weapons, but in the last year, I've heard of no MAJOR find of NBC weapons.

Few weapons we have inspire more fear in our enemies than the Apache helicopter and the Abrams MBT. If you ever see them in action, you'll know why. They are brutes, engines of destruction.

Mainly it has something to do with the .50 Raufoss rounds and the St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868. The US wasn't a part of that and considers it suitable for use on all targets. International Committee of the Red Cross tries to object to it's use using the St. Petersburg Declaration, but it was only signed by European powers considered 'Great Powers' at the time and only applied to conflicts between each other. Today most of them either don't have Raufoss, cite that the rounds normally go straight through unarmored targets before igniting and exploding, or cite that they only use them on armored targets.

the fact that only a handful of countries still exist that signed that agreement isn't helping their case either. (hadn't heard of that agreement, but of the nations of the time, most are long gone. prussia, france, russia, all have undergone a complete governmental replacement since that time, and england has changed it's government structure enough to make any previous agreements shaky.)

[Aramanthus]

That was a very cool video! Thank you for sharing it! Nice set of ammunition for the weapon. It would be a very cool one for Rifts. I could see spec forces using this weapon in rifts for various weapons.

[Armorlord]

It also might be that bit about not being able to use explosive and incendiary rounds in small caliber anti-personnel weapons. It's in the same section as the hollow points and dum-dums. There are incendiary rounds (maybe explosive ones too) for the .50BMG, generally for use against vehicular targets I think, maybe that's where the misunderstanding came from. I don't think those explosive/incendiary bullets would be assigned when the mission is supposed to be purely anti-personnel, at least they shouldn't be, under the convention. I'm not military though, so I'm just speculating based on information I've read and heard, maybe Jerell would know for sure.

The St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868 is the one that proscribes the use of incendiary and explosive materials in a 'projectile of a weight below 400 grammes', the reason it comes up regarding Raufoss Mk.211 .50 rounds in particular is because it is armor-piercing, explosive, and incendiary, with damage comparable to normal 20mm rounds, ie: the perfect multipurpose round.

Raufoss version of 20mm would be scary, but once you're using something that large might as well use the specialized rounds (like the ones in that video) for best effect. Great video btw.