HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: BTECH: "Efficiency" (Was: Re: MECH: Heavy Hammer)
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 20:56:01 GMT

In article <C08s53.Iu2@newsflash.concordia.ca> kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane) writes:
[Moved up]
>	Eff is measured by Total Custom Cost / Combat Value / 1000.
 
 
    ][nteresting.  I think I'd rather compute an efficiency value that's
 the inverse of that, though.  That is, (Combat Value * 1000) / Total
 Unit Cost.  That way, the better you are, the closer you get to 1 from
 BELOW.  Using the inverse of your equation, you get the following:
 
>	$13,750,733 is the C-Bills on WHM-6X Heavy Hammer at 4029 Combat
>	Value. Efficiency is 3.41.

    Inv. efficiency = .293

>	$ 7,161,533 is the C-Bills on WHM-7X Heavy Hammer at 3959 Combat
>	Value. Efficiency is 1.81.

    Inv. efficiency = .553

>	Now, you can make this that much more munchkin by making the
>	internal structure Endo steel, having 13 Double Heat sinks and
>	CASEing the AMS system. This would be the final WHM-7X that I'd
>	build
>
>	$ 7,419,933 is the C-Bills at 4506 Combat Value. Efficiency is
>	1.65.

    Inv. efficiency = .607
 
    |\|ot that I use C-Bill cost or Combat Values for anything, anyway.

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: conty@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (E. Kontei)
Subject: Re: BIG Naval Ships... Why not!?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 19:25:33 GMT
Keywords: Naval Ships, Realistic, BIG

In article <Bzuxro.F9u@newsflash.concordia.ca>, kgnome@cs.concordia.ca (MATIS stephane) writes:
> 
> I don't think large naval craft would be very common since most planets
> are controled by a single government (no on-planet rivalries to spur the
> creation of navies) but they would make nice trump cards to make an
> invader's life ever so much more interesting. ;)

Well, if you have a water world (like Earth), it would make VERY good sense
to have a mobile weapons platform the size of a small ground installation.

That's a great idea...
-- 
			    E n r i q u e  C o n t y
			       Master of Science!
			      jester@ihlpm.att.com
		    Disclaimer: You're not dealing with AT&T
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: a2chao@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Allen Chao)
Subject: Autocannons (BTECH)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 21:06:58 GMT

You know, it's funny how pulse lasers gain a -2 bonus from their high rate
of fire, whilst Machine guns and autocannon don't.  If autocannons gave a
-1 or -2 bonus to strike, then I could see why I'd accept the hassle of
volatile ammunition and the extra weight...
-- 
Allen Chao : a2chao@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca : Netriding at ~3:00a!
 -----You know, this lack of sleep might be why I'm so tired...------
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga)
Subject: Re: Realism vs. Mechs
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 00:50:23 GMT

saruman@cats.ucsc.edu (Nicholas Patrick Popoff) writes:



>	Wow!  You mean the old days as in 1965, right?  8-)
>	Tracking a 45mph target was cake 50 years ago.  You must be running
>Atari-400s as targeting systems.  No, worse than that...... what the hell
>do you use to navigate between stars?  Sextants?

No, one of those C-64's with the drive that made all that damn noise..


Axly

*******************************************************************************
*                         Star Captain Axly                                   *
*                         Alpha Second Nova                                   *
*                         Supernova  Second                                   *
*                        341st Assault Cluster                                *
*                            Clan Wolf                                        *
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: BTECH: Hovercraft optional rules (Was: Re: Vehicle rules and munchkinism  (with ANSWERS!))
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Distribution: world 
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 21:39:59 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.184238.3478@netcom.com> clarka@netcom.com (Andrew Clark) writes:
>> foregone@stein.u.washington.edu (Carl Chavez) writes:
>>The argument that hovercraft and VTOLs are too dangerous because of backshots
>>is ludicrous. If the mech user has light mechs, he/she can avoid the hovers
>>and VTOLs!
>
>I agree to some extent.  I feel that well-designed 'Mechs using good
>tactics can prevent backshots from being effective.  On the other hand,
>I also believe that small hovercraft are too fast and that this can be
>corrected without wrecking the entire set of vehicle rules, which seems to
>be the current FASA plan.
 
 
    ]-[ere's my optional rules to help offset the advantages that
 hovercraft have:
 
 o  After a successful ram, hovercraft automatically get a "point"
    of damage to their airskirts (-1 Crusing MP).  This is in addition
    to any other airskirt damage that is rolled on the hit location 
    tables from the ram.
 
 o  When moving at Flank speed, hovercraft must follow the VTOL
    sideslipping rules.  If the hovercraft sideslips into an
    occupied or restricted hex, it is considered to have crashed into
    that hex and cannot make any further movement or weapons attacks.
    The crash is resolved as a ram or per the VTOL crashing rules.

    ___
     |hey're still nasty for backshots, but with sideslipping they're
 a lot more dicey to handle.  Since they're always at level 0, it's
 real easy for them to sideslip into some restricted terrain and
 crash.  It's also a lot harder to line up for a backshot with
 sideslipping.

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga)
Subject: Re: Which weapon is best? (Was: Re: btech lrm)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 23:55:01 GMT

lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex) writes:

>    /-\h, but those 5 ER mediums are going to give you 25 heat if you
> fire all of them.  The 3 Pulse mediums are only going to give you 12.
> So those 5 ER MLs would require 13 DSHSes, for a total of 19 tons.

Yes, but that assumes that the 5 ER's are being fired in addition to the
main guns. I find that the 5 ER's and a targetting computer complement
LRMs very nicely.  That way I only really need 3 tons for DSHS, since
I am firing ER Mediums when I have managed to move close enough. That is
why I like the ER Medium, because you can tack that lethal 5 pack on
top of a Clan missleboat. We have had great success with a binary 
LRM 20 Ryoken using this "5 ER Medium's and a targetting computer"
combo as our secondary weapons system. Speed for days and the guns
and armor of a heavy. So, as you can see, the attractiveness of the
ER Medium is more the result of a 'Mech design philosophy than an 
attraction to an individual weapon (I myself love the Large Pulse
Laser, especially in a quad mount on Warharks.)

Axly

*******************************************************************************
*                         Star Captain Axly                                   *
*                         Alpha Second Nova                                   *
*                         Supernova  Second                                   *
*                        341st Assault Cluster                                *
*                            Clan Wolf                                        *
*******************************************************************************
From: din@gauss.rutgers.edu (dragoon)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: IS THERE A BTECH SIMULATOR IN EXISTENCE? ( like BOSTON )
Date: 21 Dec 92 18:52:47 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Yes there is.  Battletech Center's in Chicago.  What you do basically is sit in
a cockpit and run around and kill people.  Free for alls or team play.  Teams
usually consist of 4 people so you can have 2 lances going at it against each
other.  Lots of fun really.  There are 4 or 5 different variants of 4 Clan 
mechs that you can choose from:  Thor, Loki, Madcat, and Vulture.  Graphics
are excellent and there's even infra-red.  Each game lasts 10 minutes and costs
$6-$8 depending on when you go.  After each battle, you can watch the whole 
thing from a top view on a monitor outside.  So far there's only like 2 of 
these places in existence.  The other one's in Japan I think.

					Ben
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: jamull01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu (Joseph A. Muller)
Subject: Shogun Warriors for sale
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 02:04:11 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville


   I have four Shogun Warriors for sale to the highest bidder.  For the
 uninformed these were put out by Mattel in the late 70's and manufactured
 in Japan by Bandia.  They are in EXCELLENT conidtion and I still have the
 original boxes (although not in as good condition as the toys themselves :)
 These currently list for $150 *apeice*, but as I mentioned earlier I will
 sell them to the highest bidder.  Serious offers only please.  I could easily
 get $100/each for these at my local flea market but I thought I might give
 some other collectors out there a chance to pick these up.  I have the 
 following for sale:
		     Magzinga
		     Raydeen
		     Gaiking
		     Daimos
All four toys are ~ 2 feet tall and have movable arms and heads, feature
missle launchers, launchable arms, swords, etc.   Would make a nice addition
to any Mech fan's collection.
  I also have a Godzilla Shogun Warrior, but I do not yet have a listing for it.  

Send all replies via e-mail.
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: rday@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert E Day)
Subject: Re: Probably Useless, but...
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:36:31 GMT

In article <BzHqps.Ksv@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> griffin@sage.cc.purdue.edu (The Cr
ystal Griffin) writes:
>    Mech        100 tons
>    400 Engine     52.5
>    I.S.      10.0
>    Cockpit         3.0
>    Gyro       4.0
>    Armor(had to be max, of course.  Nothing but the best.  Besides,
>              max armor makes the whole thing more rediculous.)
>              19.5
>    Jump Jets(4)    8.0  (again, humor value)
>              ____=
>              97.0 tons
>
>Hmmm... what to do with three tons of weapon space on our 100 ton scout
>  mech... How about a medium laser on the arm(of course), and a totally
>  new, oh-god-am-I-going-get-flamed-for-this!, could work, riot to play,
>  just-to-piss-you-off idea.  Mount them on the legs pointing straight
>  down, so when you death from above you can add insult to injury.  Or
>  maybe spend the three tons on some kind of special targetting computer
>  that allows you, if you don't fire ANY weapons, to punch-punch-kick.

Place the lasers 1 in each of the torsos. Just add TSM, and walk into a woods
hex and rip up a tree. Then jump 4 & fire all 3 lasers for 3 rounds, then
close for melee(40 points on the punch location).

>Ooops... Just broke out the cost chart.  OK, for the one with 3 medium
>  lasers, here's the cost (remember, this is a HUNDRED TON MECH!!!):
>               10,615,333.33 C-Bills.

Adding TSM would bring the price up by 1,6000,000 C-Bills

>So, any opinions on the survivable scout mech from hell?

I don't know, but it might be fun playing it.
-- 
If the price that I must pay to obtain my *  Robert E. Day/Syr Otto von    *
freedom, is to acknowledge that the Gov-  *  Schwartzkatz, Shire Mugmort   *
ernmet was granted the power to infringe  *  Barony Middle Marches,        *
on them, then I am not free. Paul Anderson*  Middle Kingdom                *
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: probe@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Prabal Nandy)
Subject: Re: Probably Useless, but...
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 23:00:12 GMT

   What was the Pheonix Hawk and Stinger doing out there, hanging 'round a
Charger anyhow? They had to be asking for it to get it from a lumbering 80
lump o' steel! Why, a kid on a dirtbike could get away from a charger, yeah!
Heck, I know Locust Pilots who think the Charger's funny! Hey, maybe he
thought you were on his team and were huggin' him, like sayin' Hi! Or
something?


-- 
      /| ________________   |probe@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu|  Lord of the Flies 
O|===|* >________________>  |probe@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu|  1st MPC Division
      \|                    | nandy@scivax.stsci.edu |  Colony Mechworks
  Velox - Durus - Infestus  |  nandy@fos.stsci.edu   |  Colony World Myops
From: RiTz@eckert (Richard Taillon)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: MECH112.ZIP...
Date: 1 Jan 93 16:13:55 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]


jpole@world.std.com says:
>   Hiya all...
> 
>   Where can I find MECH112.ZIP?  It's not in any of the places that
> used to have it...
 
If you give me the addresses of the usual site where Mech112.zip was,

I'll be happy to send copies there.
 
RiTz
From: itchy.caltech.edu!hanishd (Daniel Hanish)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: BTECH: Combat Sub
Date: 4 Jan 1993 04:18:50 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: itchy.caltech.edu
Originator: hanishd@itchy

In article <1992Dec27.121445.7067@gw.wmich.edu> x90vanderkol@gw.wmich.edu  
writes:
> 
> MUCH STUFF DELETED
> John VanDerKolk
I'm glad someone finally posted something like this.  I was about to post  
my design- very similar, but with only 1 270 XL engine and 10 Arrow IV  
systems, each with about 15 missiles (can you say BOOM, boys and girls?)  
Subs are great because they can dive to avoid aerospace attack, can move  
covertly, carry a lot of armor, and there's no such thing as an inferno  
torpedo.  Throw in an LRM 20 or two, some SRMs, and 16 heat points worth  
of lasers- Subs get the 6 point heat sink bonus for water, or at least  
they should.
(BTW- can someone please respond to me, at least by E-mail?  I'm not sure  
if my posts have been getting through lately.)

Dan Hanish
"In a mad world only the mad can stay sane."
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga)
Subject: Re: Vehicle rules and munchkinism (was Re: high-speed hovertanks REDUX!)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 19:18:10 GMT


>	<sigh> This new rules seems to be another attempt by FA$A to
>munchinize the game. Prior to the coming of the clans, mek design was a
>great deal more complex than merely "max speed the speed, max the armour,
>and load up on MPL's and targeting computers." Back when all we had was 3025
>tek, I played mixed-unit battles, and realized that although vehicles had a
>lot of value as fire-support and recon, the main battling went to the meks
>(although don't tell that to the Shreck PPC carrier drivers...)

I  disagree with you on this. I think what FASA is trying to do is make the
'Mech the ultimate vehicle on the battlefield hands down. If that means short
changing the other types of vehicle, then so be it. As far as that  being
munchkinish..*shrug* That's a RPG term, not a military board game one. If you
are playing Mechwarrior, I can see that being an applicable term but not for
basic BTech.

>	This leads me to one of two alternatives: (1) Play under all the new
>rules, and lose a LOT more meks and a LOT more vehicles, or (2) ignore the
>new vehicle rules and make mixed-unit combat more interesting and enjoyable.
>This is something that I as a fairly experienced player can do, but I worry
>for new players who come in and realize that their only real hope in
>relatively flat terrain is to load up on those 80+ ton tank and mech
>behemoths, and for myself in case I ever come up against a tournament
>situation, although in 7 years of playing, I have yet to attend one :(

Well, anyone who fights the Clans in relatively flat terrain will get
their  heads handed to them, whether you change the vehicle rules or not.
What would be real nice for the IS side is for FASA to come out with a 
"pre-battle" maneuvering system that would let both sides manuever to 
get the terrain that would benefit them most. A map with a large scale
to it so that you could maneuver between all those different mapsheets
that are available would be real cool. The IS  could be given bonus 
movement in this phase to reflect their superiority in large unit combat-
Battalion and above. 

Axly
From: james@cs.UAlberta.CA (James Borynec; AGT Researcher)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: Re: Kaytusha vehicle
Date: 29 Dec 92 02:41:02 GMT
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada

dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga) writes:

>>For those of you who like vehicles, here is one that will 
>>survive the new FASA rules:

>>The Kaytusha (KL and KR).  3025
>>80 Ton Wheeled vehicle
>>140 ICE 10 tons (speed 2/3)
>>6 * LRM 15 with 6 * LRM15 ammo
>>Armor 10 tons (65 F, 48 L, 26 R, 21 Rear - Kaytusha KL)  
>>              (65 F, 26 L, 48 R, 21 Rear - Kaytusha KR)


>Just curious, is that 6 shots of LRM 15 ammo, or 6 tons?

6 tons.
From: jrob@ecst.csuchico.edu (Gillis the Humble)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: MUSE
Date: 26 Dec 92 17:52:26 GMT
Organization: fornia State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: psycho.ecst.csuchico.edu

OK.  Call me stupid, but I just need to know.  Is the btech MUSE down or moved?

I have been gone for a week, I came back and now it says no route to host.(or

something.)  Please post or E-mail your response.  Thanks
							

Private Cable - 4th Davion Guards
From: RiTz@aiken (Richard Taillon)
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
Subject: BTECH: Mech112.zip available at ftp.uwp.edu
Date: 31 Dec 92 18:07:20 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]


 
Folks,
I sent a copy of Klaus Breuer's MECH WAR programs.
As a reminder, the package contains many modules:
        Mech design
        Warrior design
        World design
and more. You can playtest your mechs against each other and even 
make scenarios. Well, check it out if you wish.
 
I sent it to : ftp.uwp.edu   and it's in the directory: /pud/incoming
I don't know how long it's gonna remain there...
 
               //-n-\\
       _____---=======---_____
  /====____\   /.. ..\   /____====\
 //         ---\__O__/---         \\
 \_\                             /_/
    _______        __________
   /____   )    _ /___  ____/
     __ ) /    (_)   / /  ______
    / // /    __    / /  /__   /
   / / \ \   / /   / /    /  /__
  /_/   \ \_/_/   /_/   /______/
         \_/
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: Re: Which weapon is best? (Was: Re: btech lrm)
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 00:06:27 GMT

In article <1h3al5INNa8d@golem.wcc.govt.nz> taia_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.091957.17823@netcom.com>, lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex) writes:
>> ]-[ere we go, time for the "Which weapon is best?" discussion,
>> again.  I nominate the LRM-15 for the "Best LRM" award and all
>> expenses paid trip to the beautiful scenic outer Periphery.  Do
>> I hear any nominations for the LRM-20?  Anyone?  Bueller?  Anyone?
>> Maybe some fool-- er, participant would like to nominate the LRM-10?
>> Anyone?  Ah, yes, you in the back with the bad Klingon makeup....
>> /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
>
> The ol' LRM-15 wins out for "Best LRM".
>
> For "Best SRM" I nominate the humble SRM-4, why?
>
> For best energy, the old medium laser for old tek (3025).
 
     _
    (_)k, if we're ACTUALLY going to be doing this (when I changed the
 subject line back when to read "Which weapon is best" it was supposed
 to be a joke! :)....
 
    |\/|y nomination for best ballistic weapon: the lowly Machine Gun.  (:
 After the original Medium Laser, the Machine Gun has the best damage
 to weight ratio of any weapon (4:1 for IS, or 8:1 for Clan, beating
 even all the Medium Lasers, there).  It also has the best heat to
 weight and heat to damage ratios, of course.  So it has no range...
 That just means you'll be in range for physical attacks, as well!


> BTW Lune don't knock the Klingons, they just have a lot of bad PR care of the
>Federation.
 
    ][ wasn't.  Just the makeup abilities of some S/F convention goers.  (:

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha
From: lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex)
Subject: Re: Which weapon is best? (Was: Re: btech lrm)
Organization: Netcom; Renegade User
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 19:43:18 GMT

In article <C01p3r.66t@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga) writes:
>lunatic@netcom.com (Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex) writes:
>
>>    /-\h, but those 5 ER mediums are going to give you 25 heat if you
>> fire all of them.  The 3 Pulse mediums are only going to give you 12.
>> So those 5 ER MLs would require 13 DSHSes, for a total of 19 tons.
>
>Yes, but that assumes that the 5 ER's are being fired in addition to the
>main guns. I find that the 5 ER's and a targetting computer complement
>LRMs very nicely.  That way I only really need 3 tons for DSHS, since
>I am firing ER Mediums when I have managed to move close enough. That is
>why I like the ER Medium, because you can tack that lethal 5 pack on
>top of a Clan missleboat. We have had great success with a binary 
>LRM 20 Ryoken using this "5 ER Medium's and a targetting computer"
>combo as our secondary weapons system. Speed for days and the guns
>and armor of a heavy. So, as you can see, the attractiveness of the
>ER Medium is more the result of a 'Mech design philosophy than an 
>attraction to an individual weapon (I myself love the Large Pulse
>Laser, especially in a quad mount on Warharks.)
 
 
    \_/
     |eah, but as you yourself stated, that's design philosophy.  That
 includes factors other than the individual weapons systems, which is
 what we were discussing.  Personally, for a SINGLE weapon system, I
 still much prefer the Pulse ML over the ER ML, for Clan weapons.  BTW,
 I rarely use LRMs, especially with the Clans (they're just not that
 "long range," anymore, when an ER PPC and Pulse LL both have the same
 max medium range, and an ER LL is even one hex better).

-- 
   _______________________________________________________
  /         -= Lunatic Johnathan Bruce E'Sex     (:      /
 /  lunatic@netcom.com  GEnie: LUNATIC  CI$: 76170,672  /
/______________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: rec.games.mecha