Board index » MDC Worlds » Robotech RPG Tactics™

 


Post new topic Reply to topic

WELL WHAT YOU THINK ?PLZ EXPALIN WHY Allow re-voting: enabled to change their vote EXPLAIN PLZ .
GOOD IDEA 25%  25%  [ 1 ]
BAD IDEA 50%  50%  [ 2 ]
OTHER 25%  25%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 4
Author Message
Unread postPosted: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:26 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 5:02 pm
Posts: 3810
Location: new york
Comment: NEVER QUIT..... I got lucky
The following information main for earth forces like tanks, APC, light transports, to gunship or attack helicopters to jet fight and bombers .the following is try to be close doing this blind since there are veritechs , destriods and conventional armies on earth That can be found useful in combat or limited following rules in book will be helpful . which there very little information for conventional armies on earth.
if you need clarified on my stats plz do so
the book
ROBOTECH RPG TACTICS

Type: what type of weapon it is

MD: the damage it does

IN BOOK: if it mentioning in the book

RG: range

PAGE
: where the information is in the book
N/A There no information in book

Ballistic Earth Rounds
From .30 Caliber rounds to 130 MM rounds table
Type:30 Caliber machine gun
MD:N/A 1single barrel
IN BOOK:N/A
RG: 8
PAGE:N/A


Type:50 Caliber machine gun
MD:2 single barrel
IN BOOK: 4MD
RG: 9
PAGE:47

Type: 20 MM to 29 MM rounds
MD: 3
IN BOOK: 3
RG: 9
PAGE:42

Type:30 MM TO 39 MM
MD: 4 single barrel
IN BOOK:12 MD
RG: 24/12 ?
PAGE: 46

Type: 40 MM TO 49 MM
MD: N/A 5(?) Single barrel
IN BOOK:N/A
RG:14
PAGE: N/A

Type:50 MM TO 59MM
MD: N/A 6 (55 MM ) single barrel
IN BOOK: N/A
RG:14
PAGE: 35 TO 44

Type:60 MM TO 69M
MD: N/A 7 single barrel
IN BOOK:N/A
RG: N/A 15
PAGE: N/A

Type: 70 MM TO 79MM
MD: 8
RG: 16
IN BOOK: N/A
RG: 18
PAGE: 47

Type: 80 MM TO 89 MM
MD: N/A 9
IN BOOK: N/A 9
RG: N/A 19
PAGE: N/A

Type: 90M TO 99 MM
MD:10 N/A
IN BOOK: NA
RG: N/A 20
PAGE:NA

Type:100 MM TO 119 MM
MD: N/A 11
IN BOOK: N/A
RG:22
PAGE:N/A

Type:120 MM TO 129 MM
MD: N/A 12
IN BOOK: N/A
RG:24
PAGE:N/A

Type:130 MM TO 139 MM
MD: N/A 13
IN BOOK: N/A
RG:10/24 varies
PAGE:N/A


MECHA MISSILES TABLE
Long range 9 per missile MD RG:29
Short/Medium range missiles 6 per missile MD RG:18
Rocket Launcher 2 MD per rocket RG:12
Mini missile 2 per missile RG:12

OTHER
Anti missile system Signal barrel MD :1 RG :9
Anti missile system Dual barrel MD: 2 RG: 9
Anti missile system Quad barrel MD : 4 RG :9
Chaff, flares and smoke MD none this can be either a defense roll 1d6 or 1d4

Heavy hands handle heavy weapons
Ballistic Pistols, Ballistic rifle or Ballistic assault rifle do no damage but the following yes IMHO

Type:30 Caliber machine gun
MD:N/A 1single barrel
IN BOOK:N/A
RG: 8
PAGE:N/A

Type:50 Caliber machine gun
MD:2 single barrel
IN BOOK: 4MD
RG: 9
PAGE:47

Type: Grenade Launchers
MD: 4 single barrel
IN BOOK: N/A
RG: 6
PAGE:N/A

Heavy hand handle Missile table
Mini missile 2 per missile RG:12
Short range missiles 6 per missile MD RG:18
Rocket Launcher 2 MD per rocket RG:12

MD stats
Land or air or space convoy MD 6
Modern battle tank 15
APC 10
Earth jet single engine 10
Earth jet twain engine 13
Gunship 9
Car civilian 4

_________________
let your YES be YES and your NO be NO but plz no maybe


Last edited by ZINO on Wed Dec 24, 2014 6:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.

          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:27 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 1:49 pm
Posts: 118
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
First off, you mention page references, but don't list the book(s) they reference. Second, it took me several reads to even understand what you were asking. If you want constructive replies, then I suggest put a little more effort into editing your initial post and cleaning up the grammar.

To answer your question, I'm not sure if these are useful or not, mainly because I have no idea how the stats were converted and if they jive with the RPG. I voted OTHER for that reason.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 2:27 pm
  

User avatar
Hero

Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:18 pm
Posts: 1323
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
There's... a lot here with minimal context.

I suppose if I had the time/inclination to peruse Wikipedia or other sources to find out exactly what armaments various real earth weapon systems had, the damage by caliber table might hold some use, but I'm more inclined to balance conventional forces by game purpose than exacting specifications. Also, there seems to be a lot of superfluous information when you could've just said "damage dealt equals mm divided by 10" and come to roughly the same conclusion for Ballistic rounds.

I get that the Civilian Car listing is included to give context based on what I've read in the Rifts books, but keep in mind that what you're saying is that a modern car is almost as hard to destroy as a Battlepod (though I guess that could be influenced by its defense rating being negligible).

Why are jets given similar MD Capacity to tanks? Also, compare those numbers against the listings for missiles. If fighters are allowed to 'roll with impact' like VTs are, it could take 3+ LRMs just to drop a single fighter by those numbers, which seems awfully high. I'm not a pilot, but I'm pretty sure getting tagged by a modern missile is a bad day even for something as tough as a Warthog, let alone something like the F-35 or F-22 or whatever. The emphasis seems to be more on stealth/getting the first shot from long range, whereas those numbers seem more like a drawn out punch up kinda range.

Hell, I believe VT's are only 14 MDC, and those are supposed to be absurdly tough (as in, survive crashing through a city block with just scratches, I don't think a modern fighter can do that).

From the cartoon and novels, the impression I've always been under is that Robotechnology changed the game, and that conventional forces simply don't stand a fighting chance. Hyper tough alloys/materials, incredibly powerful weapons, etc. These numbers, even if realistic (and that's going to be highly subjective without a LOT of math involved), put conventional forces more on par with the 'hyper advanced technology' than one would expect based on the setting.

As with all such efforts for personal use, I applaud putting some work into this, but as it stands I would not use this as a reference for my games.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 2:54 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 5:02 pm
Posts: 3810
Location: new york
Comment: NEVER QUIT..... I got lucky
Axoid wrote:
First off, you mention page references, but don't list the book(s) they reference. Second, it took me several reads to even understand what you were asking. If you want constructive replies, then I suggest put a little more effort into editing your initial post and cleaning up the grammar.

To answer your question, I'm not sure if these are useful or not, mainly because I have no idea how the stats were converted and if they jive with the RPG. I voted OTHER for that reason.

I AGREE IT JUST I REALLY DID A BAD FORMAT MAN I BEEN THINKING WHAT I POST AND AHHH I MESS UP HERE

_________________
let your YES be YES and your NO be NO but plz no maybe


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 3:35 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 5:02 pm
Posts: 3810
Location: new york
Comment: NEVER QUIT..... I got lucky
Forar wrote:
There's... a lot here with minimal context.

I suppose if I had the time/inclination to peruse Wikipedia or other sources to find out exactly what armaments various real earth weapon systems had, the damage by caliber table might hold some use, but I'm more inclined to balance conventional forces by game purpose than exacting specifications. Also, there seems to be a lot of superfluous information when you could've just said "damage dealt equals mm divided by 10" and come to roughly the same conclusion for Ballistic rounds.


Forar wrote:
I get that the Civilian Car listing is included to give context based on what I've read in the Rifts books, but keep in mind that what you're saying is that a modern car is almost as hard to destroy as a Battlepod (though I guess that could be influenced by its defense rating being negligible).
i agree with on this it may be to high so lower to a MD2

Forar wrote:
Why are jets given similar MD Capacity to tanks? Also, compare those numbers against the listings for missiles. If fighters are allowed to 'roll with impact' like VTs are, it could take 3+ LRMs just to drop a single fighter by those numbers, which seems awfully high. I'm not a pilot, but I'm pretty sure getting tagged by a modern missile is a bad day even for something as tough as a Warthog, let alone something like the F-35 or F-22 or whatever. The emphasis seems to be more on stealth/getting the first shot from long range, whereas those numbers seem more like a drawn out punch up kinda range.


i agree also is to high lower MD Capacity 7 instead
add missiles which are listed in the book
long ,short and mini missiles for dog fight with fighter pod also add chaff ,flares and smoke for sonic jet fighters all types
a Warthog is sub sonic should get a MD Capacity 10 and are able to maneuver better
add missiles which are listed in the book
long ,short and mini missiles for dog fight with fighter pod also add chaff ,flares and smoke ,better maneuver then sonic jet fighter

Forar wrote:
The emphasis seems to be more on stealth/getting the first shot from long range, whereas those numbers seem more like a drawn out punch up kinda range
i think VFE apply applies here

Forar wrote:
Hell, I believe VT's are only 14 MDC, and those are supposed to be absurdly tough (as in, survive crashing through a city block with just scratches, I don't think a modern fighter can do that).


Forar wrote:
From the cartoon and novels, the impression I've always been under is that Robotechnology changed the game, and that conventional forces simply don't stand a fighting chance. Hyper tough alloys/materials, incredibly powerful weapons, etc. These numbers, even if realistic (and that's going to be highly subjective without a LOT of math involved), put conventional forces more on par with the 'hyper advanced technology' than one would expect based on the setting.
yes the MD capacity may be too high here

Forar wrote:
As with all such efforts for personal use, I applaud putting some work into this, but as it stands I would not use this as a reference for my games.

thank you so much i humble by your words last

trust me i wish you seen my email i have over two hundreds email asking me of all people about tanks , APC ,gunship or attack chopper and even cars !!!
and i wish i build my set miniatures by i tried my hand shakes so much by to an injury :-(
with my right hand have to save cold hard cash and hope to get an artist and builder i been talking to make it for me
and wont see my the cash till next year at best i have the first wave and a conventional army as well 6 MM size to match at best the size of robotech mecha
my kids been ask when can they play and show what i had to do i broke my heart when i saw their faces ,(mind you they 10 and 12 and a ahead of the class ) wish i had a Little more money to send and get it done for them and for me

you didn't say a word about Ballistic Earth Rounds From .30 Caliber rounds to 130 MM rounds table
did you miss that table ? no comment? i hope you can reply to this

MD stats original ideas
Land or air or space convoy MD 6
Modern battle tank 15
APC 10
Earth jet single engine 10
Earth jet twin engine 13
Gunship 9
Car civilian 4




MD stats
Land or air or space convoy MD 6
Modern battle tank 12 these are for track ,wheel or hover systems
APC 9 these are for track ,wheel or hover systems
Earth jet fighter sonic 7
Earth jet fighter sub sonic (general ) 7 BUT for an A-10 others 10
Gunship 6
Car civilian 2

Forar looking forward for your reply

_________________
let your YES be YES and your NO be NO but plz no maybe


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 6:01 pm
  

User avatar
Hero

Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:18 pm
Posts: 1323
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
ZINO wrote:
you didn't say a word about Ballistic Earth Rounds From .30 Caliber rounds to 130 MM rounds table
did you miss that table ? no comment? i hope you can reply to this


That's what I was talking about when I said this:

"Also, there seems to be a lot of superfluous information when you could've just said "damage dealt equals mm divided by 10" and come to roughly the same conclusion for Ballistic rounds."

20-29mm = 3md
30-39mm = 4md

It's a big table that seems to basically break down to a formula vaguely along the lines of "X mm divided by 10 and add 1, ignore any remainder"

45mm? 5md

69mm? 7md

With a pattern that consistent, having a giant table with page references (but no listing as to what book it's referencing), having a basic formula and some examples seems like a much tidier way to do things.

That said, I do have a hard time believing it'd be such a linear path, and much like my comment on MD Capacity, these numbers make modern weapons systems terrifying compared to the "hyper advanced technology" that's supposed to be present.

A M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tank has a 120mm main gun, which by your system (ignoring differences in ammunition) would deal 13 MD. That's enough to 1-shot a Battlepod even if they spent a command point to roll with the impact.

Remember, Destroids are supposed to be 'walking tanks packing the firepower and armour of a modern tank division'. A couple of tanks giving a Destroid a run for its money doesn't really feel like that.

What we're seeing here, imo, is trying to match 'fluff' (what we know of things) to the 'crunch' (the math behind the game mechanics). If we want to remain true to the show/rpg, the MD and MDC of non-Zentraedi/RDF things should probably be toned down. If that's not a consideration, then at least to me, it's still less important to have every bit of minutia covered, and more important to determine 'what role in the game or on the RPG table does this cover'? Are tanks meant to actively be feared by ground forces? Then rock 'em out. If they're meant to be a cheap (in points costs) set of harassing obstacles to put in the way, adjust accordingly.

Just saying "a 120mm gun deals 13 MD" is a small piece of the puzzle, and frankly, small enough to not mean much without greater context.


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 6:16 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 5:02 pm
Posts: 3810
Location: new york
Comment: NEVER QUIT..... I got lucky
I so agree with with on this
try to come with a table here for Ballistic Earth Rounds and MD for general simple rules adding BATTLE TANKS ,APC ,GUNSHIP FIGHTER JETS
and there some rules we can from the boos and use
what would you can?love to hear from you man :)

_________________
let your YES be YES and your NO be NO but plz no maybe


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 6:29 pm
  

User avatar
Hero

Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:18 pm
Posts: 1323
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Well, at that point we're basically designing an expansion/supplementary document to the game system. Hell, they could even be considered a fourth faction, with the option to be included in RDF or Malcontent forces as a 'mercenary' system of sorts.

I'd envision conventional forces as being very cheap, not hitting very hard or taking much punishment. Something that would have to 'swarm' even harder than Battlepods to win. Maybe a limited number allowed (X cards or points worth) to keep it from just being a mess with a hundred tanks/choppers on the table, which would slow things down considerably.

Basically, even if we 'can', is it worth doing in terms of gameplay? What need does it fulfill? It's sounding more and more like an RPG supplement, but at that point... why not just use the RPG?

I've got 7 figures built and might be up to 15 by the end of the evening, but as I haven't even started playing the game yet, I'm not terribly inclined by begin looking to expand on it personally.

Glad to give feedback a few times, but there are only so many hours in the day, y'know?


          Top  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 6:52 pm
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 5:02 pm
Posts: 3810
Location: new york
Comment: NEVER QUIT..... I got lucky
Forar wrote:
Well, at that point we're basically designing an expansion/supplementary document to the game system. Hell, they could even be considered a fourth faction, with the option to be included in RDF or Malcontent forces as a 'mercenary' system of sorts.

I'd envision conventional forces as being very cheap, not hitting very hard or taking much punishment. Something that would have to 'swarm' even harder than Battlepods to win. Maybe a limited number allowed (X cards or points worth) to keep it from just being a mess with a hundred tanks/choppers on the table, which would slow things down considerably.

Basically, even if we 'can', is it worth doing in terms of gameplay? What need does it fulfill? It's sounding more and more like an RPG supplement, but at that point... why not just use the RPG?

I've got 7 figures built and might be up to 15 by the end of the evening, but as I haven't even started playing the game yet, I'm not terribly inclined by begin looking to expand on it personally.

Glad to give feedback a few times, but there are only so many hours in the day, y'know?

INDEED MAN ;)

_________________
let your YES be YES and your NO be NO but plz no maybe


          Top  
 
 
Post new topic Reply to topic



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group