HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: BTECH record sheets (Was: Re: Arrow IV mech and spotter)
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:04:18 GMT

In article <1js0j1INNerj@charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu> jrob@ecst.csuchico.edu (Gillis the Humble) writes:
>In article <1jnhk0INNdq0@cobra.cs.ubc.ca> edmonds@cs.ubc.ca (Brian Edmonds) writes:
>>What happened to the rule (page 113, sec 11) that the armour in any 
>>location canot exceed twice the amount of internal structure for that 
>>location? 
>>
>and WHY, might I ask, do they give you do many CT armor spots you can never use?
>And why are there so many mistakes in the blank 'mech sheets?
>
>(too many CT internal pts, and only 20 leg pts.(YOU NEED 21 FOR a 100 TON mech!)
>and WHY is it that, after three different books, they still don't fix the missing
>armor point on the left arm?
 
     _
    /-\ctually, most of those errors crept in with the Compendium.
 All of the blank record sheets up to the BattleTech Manual include
 that missing arm point, have three extra internal structure points
 in the side torsos, one extra IS point in the center torso, and
 have correct IS points in the legs.  The record sheets in the
 Compendium have a missing point on the left arm, have *FOUR* extra
 IS points in the side torsos, one extra IS point in the center
 torso, and are missing one IS point in the legs.  Obviously, that
 missing leg IS point was moved up to the torsos, and they took one
 armour point from the left arm to compensate for the extra IS point
 in the center torso.  <grin>  That still leaves them with six extra
 IS points total, in the side torsos....
 
    \_/
     |ou'll also notice, with both the old and new record sheets,
 that all three torso armour locations have two more boxes on the
 front than the total number of points that those locations can
 hold (front AND back).
    ___
     |he original 2nd edition BattleTech rulebook even had Gyro
 misspelled "Gryo" on the record sheets.
 
    ][ personally use the sheets from CityTech.  Gyro is spelled
 correctly, and they just have some extra points in all the torso
 locations.  It's also a staple-bound book, so it's easier to fold
 open when photocopying.

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
From: whelal@engr.UVic.CA (Wael  Helal)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: Stephane-New FASA L.O.S. Rules???
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:04:08 GMT
Reply-To: whelal@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

In article 728095920@staff.tc.umn.edu, busch006@staff.tc.umn.edu (Johnny R.) writes:
>
>
>	I was wondering if FASA will ever update thier LOS rules? As
>they are they're too simplystic. I think just about everyone thing
>they SUCK!! Also I'm working on a new LOS system but it needs further
>refinement. I will post it for play testing when I finish. I'm basing
>them on the LOS we get from a Full Scale model of the maps. There's a
>pattern to it we're just trying to get it into a simple formula. (the
>hard part)  I was wondering if FASA would be interested?
> Also I was wondering if you could (in your infinite busy-ness) make a few rule
>clarifications. In the compendium they say that a mech is only 1 level
>high yet in the part describing terrain they say  a mech is 2 levels
>high. How high is  a mech according to FASA? I assume it's 2 levels
>high. And laastly is fasa in the LOS rules assuming a mech is 1 or 2
>levels high?
>
>
>
>					Tanks,
>
>					Johnnyb

Check out Mecha-Press one first or second printing they have LOS rules for battletech 
for all kinds of terrain. But good luck in finding it because it is almost in possible 
to find.

Wael Helal
(whelal@sirius.UVic.CA)
From: edmonds@cs.ubc.ca (Brian Edmonds)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: Arrow IV mech and spotter
Date: 24 Jan 1993 12:52:03 -0800
Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: cobra.cs.ubc.ca

bradleah@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (II Andrew Bradley) wrote:
> WHAT!?!?!? YOU MEAN I HAVE TO ADD IN THE BACK AS WELL!?!?!?!
Unfortunately, that does appear to be the case. :)


> Well, here is the "correct" armor value for the mech....but this  
>does create a sorta problem....extra tonnage.....BOY, now what to do with  
>that??????
Well, if you've got the crits, I'd highly recommend Ferro-Fibre.

>R/L Torso		32	    32		12 each
Almost right.  The side torsos only have 21 IS points though...

> Boy, don't let someone get behide you in this mech ;)
*grin*  From all the mechs I've seen so far, that's a general
observation

> And in reguards to the question about the crits......well this  
>mech has no arms so the crits. get added in with the torso ones ;)
Well, after looking at the Compendium again, I noticed in the second 
last paragraph of section 10 of Battlemech Construction the following 
paragraph: 

  "The critical slots for AC/20 type weapons, Arrow IV missile systems, 
   and artillery weapons (Long Tom, Thumper, and Sniper) can be split 
   between adjacent locations.  All other weapons and equipment must 
   have all of their critical slots in a single location." 

From this I would surmise that you should actually keep at least the 
upper arms on both sides and then you can remove the lower arm and hand 
actuators and still have four extra crits to assign to each Arrow IV 
system.  Even better, keep the whole arm and you'll have enough extra 
crits easily for the Ferro-Fibrous armour. 

If you can reconstruct your mech design to fit all these rules, I'd be 
interested in seeing it again. :)  The Arrow IV designs look promising.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Edmonds (MSc CompSci)                            edmonds@cs.ubc.ca
From: mpearson@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Matthew Pearson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: MechWar - which graphics support to use?
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:05:31 GMT
Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA

In article <1k3jucEINNoi@uni-erlangen.de> kabreuer@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Klaus Breuer) writes:
>Hi everyone!
>
>I've just bought the TEGL Windows Toolkit v2.2 and are (except
>for the truly _ghastly_ handbook) very happy with it.
>So I'll probably use it as a GUI.
>
>
>The question is now: what graphics resolution should I support?
>Since I'm doing pixel-orientated graphics, I'm _not_ going to
>support more than one mode.
>
>So: how many of you would wish to twist my neck if I force them
>to use SVGA? VGA?
>
>Following resolutions are possible:  EGA 640x350x16
>                                     VGA 640x480x16
>                                     VGA 320x200x256 
>                                    SVGA 640x480x256
>
>What would you prefere? How many of you don't even have VGA?
>
>Ciao,
>Klaus
>---
>Klaus Breuer, Rudelsweiher Str. 6b, 8520 Erlangen, Germany
>** "Geez, I need a _reason_ for everything?" --Calvin 
>** "Should I or shouldn't I? -- Too late, I did!" --Hobbes
From: chaprac@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (SCALIEN)
Subject: Re: Robotech vs. ?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 21:00:50 GMT

OOPS!  I typed in wrong earlier the SDF-1 carries more veritechs than the 
Shiva.  The veritechs had clear speriority.



SCALIEN

Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: ccsakany@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Christopher Csakany)
Subject: Clans Song
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 02:30:16 GMT

    Would the author of that hilarious 'Mecha of the Clan' song please 
repost, or better mail it and save bandwidth.   Many thanks in advance.
						CJ Csakany

Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: drac@uumeme.chi.il.us (Bruce Maynard)
Subject: Re: Battletech RP
Organization: UUMEME Public Access Xenix
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 10:32:43 GMT

In article <19JAN199301525938@pavo.concordia.ca> gk_gilm@pavo.concordia.ca (GILMORE, GRAHAM K.) writes:
>
>	For those of you who are interested, there's a Multi User Battletech
>role playing game at 129.72.2.48 3026.
>

Ok, and for those of us who might be unfamiliar with that designation?

Hmmm... pro'lly an Internet real-time address, mebbe?

-- 
* The above are the meanderings of a demented soul. | drac@uumeme.chi.il.us
* Long live Dementia!  8-{)}                        | Bruce Maynard
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
From: v076jy2p@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Capt'n Quaalude)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: Btech Muse (What happened?)
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:45:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <Jan.27.11.35.53.1993.28574@andromeda.rutgers.edu>, dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Donald A Shaffer) writes...
> 
>  Anyoe know what happend to the battleTEch MUSE, I've been trying to
>log in for a while and its not letting me in.  I've got work to do their
>to.
> 
>DOn Shaffer AKA Aramus
>dshaffer@andromeda.rutgers.edu

When you find out, please be so kind as to tell me.  I'm having the same
problems.

================================================================================
If something can go wrong, FIX it! (To hell with Murphy.)  When in doubt, THINK!
If you can't win, change the rules.  If you can't change the rules, ignore them.
The squeaky wheel gets canned.  Do things by the book, but be the author. If you
can't beat 'em, join'em then beat'em.  Everything in your life is based on some-
thing else and in order to live a full life you must find what lies at the root
of all else.  For me, it's myself.
			       _______________
The world needs a new kind     |_____________|	   Robert Goodfellow was a
hero. A hero that can't be       |         |	   normal student, until one
bought off, scared off, or       | Capt'n  |	   day he needed to relax and 
killed off.  Such a hero,        | Quaalude|	   swallowed a radioactive 
would have to be on drugs.       | 3 times |	   quaalude...
			         | a day   |
				 |         |
				 |_________|
			The man who should be on drugs
================================================================================
From: logerius@spiff.cs.hut.fi (Lord Logerius of Angmar)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Six-limbed mechs `?'
Date: 23 Jan 1993 15:29:42 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, CS lab
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: spiff.cs.hut.fi
Summary: Will this work?



  I just played with the idea of four-legged and two-armed mechs..
Not a too bad balance endangering thing ..

 Ok leg hit locations one would simply double.. ones for front and ones for
rear and hits to them could be handled after a leg hit had been scored
one would be check which leg had been hit.

 +:sess
	Sidestep of four legged mechs 
	Arm mounted weapons
	More hit locations

 -:ses
	Two more locations to assign armor.
	Implementing jumpjets might be impossible
	ummmh.. can't think of any more..anybody?

Basically I'm just after centaur type mechs...

 So what do you think of this idea?... not all bogus..
Any comments what to add?? it isn't too powerfull or what do you think ?




--
                                                                       
   Patrick Buchert                      Helsinki University of Technology
    pbuchert@hut.fi                      Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
     logerius@hut.fi
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane)
Subject: Re: [Btech] SPREADSHEET
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 13:37:13 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.145012.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> tfpayn01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>> Does anyone want my spreadsheet ? WK1 format is ugly, as I use a lot of
>> colors to help with visualisation. Ie anything in light blue is
>> "editable".
>> 
>> 	XLS, WK1 and Mesa format are available.
>
>	YES, PLEASE!!

	Ok .. but what format ?


+---------------------------------+   ___     ___       ___
| Stephane I. Matis               |  /   \_BATLLETECH  /\__\ Viva NeXT! 
| E-Mail : kgnome@cs.concordia.ca |  \___/   \___/     \/__/ NeXTSTEP 3.0!
| "It Just Works..." - Steve Jobs |      \___/   
+---------------------------------+       Wolfnet Operative & NeXThead
From: fannicm@wkuvx1.bitnet (Master Hawk)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: [Btech] Engines....Hmmmm.
Date: 22 Jan 93 13:04:15 CST
Organization: Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY


   It is time to dust off my old complaints about BT and thereby be
accused of munchkinism (which I ignore at any rate so don't bother).  

Engines
   The non-linear system used by the BT publishers to determine engine rate
for each size strikes me as odd.  For example, a 10 rated engine weighs .5
tons; a 20 rated is either .5 or 1.0 (I do not have me books with me, but I
believe it is .5).  An engine of twice the power weighs just as much...why
use a 10 rated engine? (I know, I know.  Who wants to use a 10 anyway...)
   OK, no problem.  Both engines are small and we can call it a rounding
problem (i.e. the 10 weighs .25 but quarter ton weights aren't supported,
etc.)  so let us look at larger differences.  The 100 to 200, for example. 
Twice the size, almost 3 times the weight...OK, no problem, it might look
like that with a linear system...How about the 200 to 400.  Hmmm, over SIX
(6) times the weight for a mere doubling of power.  Well that is the real
gist of my complaint.

   I did propose a solution, but no one really cared at the time, so I
thought that I'd bore you all.  In my opinion, the 300 rated engine would
be about right, maybe even the 330 or so.  My (simple) solution was just to
re-figure the engine tables on a linear scale with the 300 (330, etc.) as
the base and round up to the nearest quarter or half ton, depending on your
house rules.  That would leave you with a table like this:

Rating               Tons
10                   .75 or 1  (quarter or half ton increment)
15                   1
20                   1.5
.
.
.        
100                  6.5
.
.
.
200                  13
.
.
400                  26

   So, any thoughts are appreciated.

--Master Hawk--(
From: Steve.Lamb@f1369.n203.z1.fidonet.org (Steve Lamb)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Btech Accessories
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:53:10 GMT

Mark,

Monday January 18 1993 22:00, Mark Kobayashi wrote to All:

 MK> Do you need to have the Battletech Compendium if you have
 MK> the Battletech 3rd Edition?

    Yes.

 MK> I thought FASA said that the Compendium information was
 MK> incorporated into the 3rd edition rulebook?  Or am I wrong?

    Wrong.  They didn't.  Hell, they have a LOT of mistakes in there.  I
thought Cyberpunk 2013 was the #1 book for printing errors.  I can point out 4
right away.

1: The didn't put the proper diagram for one rule, the used the diagram from
the previous page in the exact same spot.  :/
2: Another Diagram was put on in reverse!
3 & 4: The book says you will be directed to use the training scenerios in the
back of the book through-out the rules.  I checked the book twice.  #1 & #2
are in the book, but not referenced to.  I'm assuming they forgot.  :(

Steve C. Lamb, SysOp of Abcb Cafe     | "Wherefore art thou Ushiko-san!?"
Abcb Cafe 1:203/1369@Fidonet.org      |                    -- Umao-san
    Data: (916) 363-1424              | "Wherefore art thou Umao-san!?"
cm644@cleveland.freenet.edu           |                    -- Ushiko-san
abcbcafe!foxx@csusac.ecs.csus.edu     |   From Kimagure Orange Road
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: jjhayes@nbrwh75.bnr.ca (Jeff Hayes)
Subject: Re: [Btech] SPREADSHEET
Reply-To: jjhayes@bnr.ca
Organization: Northern Telecom Public Switching, Bramalea Product Tech. S908
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 23:10:46 GMT

In article <C1Gr62.752@newsflash.concordia.ca>, kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane) writes:
_]In article <1993Jan25.145012.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> tfpayn01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
_]>> Does anyone want my spreadsheet ? WK1 format is ugly, as I use a lot of


	I can also offer a spreadsheet, but done in Excel.  Written on Mac
and ported to Windows version.
Handles: LAMs, 3050 tech.
Provides: value in c-bills
nifty stuff: fills in all data for weapons and opt equip given the name

	I am in the process of creating a set of Excel macros that will let
me move the data for a mech from the construction sheet to a database and
back.  This has obvious advantages for those of us who tinker with mech
designs when we cannot sleep.

	Please request by mail.  If i get 5 or more I will do it.  It will
be a bit of a chore to get the sheets up to my wkstn at work from my
PC at home.  But if others can benefit I'm willing.
-- 

jeff hayes                      (esn) 333-3894  (fax)..3083 (416) 452-3894
jjhayes@bnr.ca                  NT, Prod Tech, dept S908, Bramalea Ont Can
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: moore@gibbs.oit.unc.edu (Hall Moore)
Subject: Re: [Btech] Engines....Hmmmm.
Organization: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:53:59 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.130415.5170@wkuvx1.bitnet> fannicm@wkuvx1.bitnet (Master Hawk) writes:
>
>   It is time to dust off my old complaints about BT and thereby be
>accused of munchkinism (which I ignore at any rate so don't bother).  
>
>Engines
>   The non-linear system used by the BT publishers to determine engine rate
>for each size strikes me as odd.  For example, a 10 rated engine weighs .5
>tons; a 20 rated is either .5 or 1.0 (I do not have me books with me, but I
>believe it is .5).  An engine of twice the power weighs just as much...why
>use a 10 rated engine? (I know, I know.  Who wants to use a 10 anyway...)
>   OK, no problem.  Both engines are small and we can call it a rounding
>problem (i.e. the 10 weighs .25 but quarter ton weights aren't supported,

Stuff Deleted

>   So, any thoughts are appreciated.
>
>--Master Hawk--(

    This is by no means an explanation for WHY FASA did things this way, but
there was a method to their madness.  Here's how to discover it.  Take some
charting/graphing type package.  Feed it the book list of engine ratings
(ER) and tonnages (TON).  Plot with X = ER and Y = ER/TON.  Do a simple
curve fit.  (Due to the above noted rounding problems, this works best if
you don't use any data for engines below about 250 ER).  After a little
manipulation of the above curve fit (which is a line with a coefficient of
correlation ca. 0.9969 if I recall), you should get an equation similar to
the following:

	TON = ER / (40.757 - (0.082803 * ER))

    Get a spread sheet to grind the crank on this, and round all
calculated TONs to the nearest 0.5 tons (n.0 to n.24999 -> n.0; n.25 to
n.74999 -> n.5; n.75 to n.99999 -> n+1).  This gives the book value for
all but five engines.  The five discrepencies are as follows.

     ER     Book TON     Calc. TON     Rounded TON
     90        3            2.70           2.5
     115       4            3.68           3.5
     170       6            6.37           6.5
     175       7            6.66           6.5
     355      31.5          31.24          31

    As you can see, the equation never gives a rounded result which is
more than 0.5 tons away from the book value.  Again, I offer no
rationalization for this, but the math works well.

    For the ultimate munchkin out there, plug 495 into the above equation.
 The non-XL 495 engine gives your 55 tonner a 9 walk and weighs -2147.5 tons. 
Think of the hell you can raise with that :)
-- 
* For purposes of complying with the New Jersey Right to Know Act,
  contents of this post partially unknown.
From: Steve.Lamb@f1369.n203.z1.fidonet.org (Steve Lamb)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: MacII vs Daishi
Date: 20 Jan 93 11:23:56 GMT

Zachary,

Tuesday January 19 1993 15:45, Zachary S Tseng wrote to All:

 ZST> tons.  Put into BTech terms and one can see that a single barrel itself
                      ^^^^^

    Which is why I stated in my message before on the subject.  The two games
are completely different and SHOULDN'T be compared.  And personally, after
getting the v3.0 BattleTech I am quite UNimpressed with it.  Still seems to
klunky compared to Mekton and Robotech.  Mekton has the good "feel" to it
which is the mainstay of R.Talsorian games and Robotech, quite frankly, has a
better RPG system.

Steve C. Lamb, SysOp of Abcb Cafe     | "Wherefore art thou Ushiko-san!?"
Abcb Cafe 1:203/1369@Fidonet.org      |                    -- Umao-san
    Data: (916) 363-1424              | "Wherefore art thou Umao-san!?"
cm644@cleveland.freenet.edu           |                    -- Ushiko-san
abcbcafe!foxx@csusac.ecs.csus.edu     |   From Kimagure Orange Road
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: flindholm@mta.ca
Subject: Re: Six-limbed mechs `?'
Reply-To: flindholm@mta.ca
Organization: Mount Allison U, Sackville, N.B. Canada 
Distribution: inet
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 00:16:19 GMT

In article <1jro97INNc9h@sauna.cs.hut.fi>, logerius@spiff.cs.hut.fi (Lord Logerius of Angmar) writes:
>
>
>  I just played with the idea of four-legged and two-armed mechs..
>Not a too bad balance endangering thing ..
>
> Ok leg hit locations one would simply double.. ones for front and ones for
>rear and hits to them could be handled after a leg hit had been scored
>one would be check which leg had been hit.
>
> +:sess
>	Sidestep of four legged mechs 
>	Arm mounted weapons
>	More hit locations
>
> -:ses
>	Two more locations to assign armor.
>	Implementing jumpjets might be impossible
>	ummmh.. can't think of any more..anybody?
>
>Basically I'm just after centaur type mechs...
>
> So what do you think of this idea?... not all bogus..
>Any comments what to add?? it isn't too powerfull or what do you think ?
>
>
>
>
>--
>                                                                       
>   Patrick Buchert                      Helsinki University of Technology
>    pbuchert@hut.fi                      Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
>     logerius@hut.fi

    I like it! It has that creationist feel. The idea of building something
new and fresh instead of reworking old technology and ideas. 
  On the practical standpoint, technicaly I don't think the rules for 
building Mechs are able to handle it, but who cares? It's a cool idea which
is all the prerequisite you need to start tinkering around.

               Cyrus