The Scorpion might not be ridiculous garbage...

[EmptyPepsiCan]

Provocative title, I know, but it's the exact epiphany I had when I was looking at pictures of the new 1/72 Max Factory Abitate F35C Blizzard Gunner kit. For those of you who don't recollect the story of the Unseen, the Blizzard Gunner uses the same artwork as the SCP-1N Scorpion. Been waiting for that kit for a year.

Anyway, I always kind of figured that the Scorpion was garbage. My reasoning was that any humanoid mech with hands - so most of the 3025 collection - would just grab it and flip it over, or maybe climb on board and tear it apart piece by piece. It's only supposed advantage was being a more stable firing platform, which is nonsense anyway, since a running Scorpion would be an incredibly unstable firing platform and an unmoving bipedal mech would be just as stable as a Scorpion.

Then, as I said, I looked at the pictures and decided that the Scorpion might actually be the only mech that could possible make any real world sense.

For example, here's the lateral movement:

Picture this guy hunkered down behind a low rise, leaning up and over a bit to take a PPC shot between a couple of boulders, and then ducking back out of sight. Brilliant!

And this (admittedly stupid looking) pose is even better:

Set up behind a larger hill, ridge, or building, or in a forest or neighborhood, then pop up to fire. Duck back down to be completely protected, and then scuttle to the side to pop up in an unexpected spot without ever being exposed to enemy fire. All of those enemy mechs are stomping around taller than most of the cover and generally exposed, while Mr. Scorpion stays low and unseen.

Granted, any 3025 mech would still be likely to climb on its back and and rip hunks off, but as long-range support mechs these things would be really tough, especially if the pointless SRM were replaced with an LRM rack.

And there's my epiphany. My wife doesn't want to discuss it for some reason, so I thought I'd share it here.

 

[stjobe]

It's a little like tank destroyers - not as sexy as a regular tank, but oh so effective when used properly:

(source: Wikipedia entry for Sturmgeschütz III)

 

[The Shadowhawke]

Does make me wish they'd have included quads in the game...

 

[unclecid]

and limited firing arcs....no torso twist...no turret.

and then there are the goliath types which seem to be far less flexible with hinge jointed legs.

i could get behind quads if they had turrets.

always thought of them as ungodly abomination of turret-less tank someone stuck mech legs on

 

[Packrat]

i could get behind quads if they had turrets.

Later in the timeline, some of them do.

 

[EmptyPepsiCan]

and limited firing arcs....no torso twist...no turret.

Yeah, it really only works for long range fire support, but it would actually be a spectacular design for that role. Sure, a turret would be better, but the articulation of the legs would allow quite a bit of swivel, and at long range that would be more than enough.

The Goliath is a whole other story. That thing is total garbage. It has all of the he disadvantages of a quad design and none of the advantages.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

If the decision had been made to put them in the game, I think you'd see a little modification in their playability.


No point in putting anything in the game for novelty that's unusable...

...unless it's a Hatchetman.

 

[Rubidium]

Even the Hatchetman eventually got them to invent a non-canon variant so it's usable (the 3X is actually quite nasty).

But yeah, if someone actually made mechs, they'd want 4 (or better yet, 6) legs. 2 legs are inherently unstable while walking (your brain has to do a lot of excess calculations to keep you from falling over while you walk, and things like standing up without using your hands are even more difficult). 4 or more legs means you can keep 3 points of contact with the ground at all times, maintaining sure footing even through the most difficult terrain (as well as doing things like crawling and popping up, as OP mentioned).

Humans only have 2 legs because of an evolutionary quirk (it's vastly easier for natural selection to turn an already existing pair of legs into arms than it is to evolve a new set of limbs out of nothing); it's one of many things about the human body that no one do if you were designing an organism from scratch. Engineers would have the luxury of starting from scratch, and would have no reason to limit themselves to 2 legs except for aesthetic reasons.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

Someone had commented in a Facebook Battletech group that a quad would not have the luxury of a torso twist, but I'm going to argue that, because four legs should be able to reorient the mech's facing very quickly.

With a flatter main torso or hull, turrets can deliver a full firing arc
...as long as quads keep their legs functional, they should be able to turn soft armor away from fire, and should have a stability bonus.

 

[unclecid]

Someone had commented in a Facebook Battletech group that a quad would not have the luxury of a torso twist, but I'm going to argue that, because four legs should be able to reorient the mech's facing very quickly.

With a flatter main torso or hull, turrets can deliver a full firing arc
...as long as quads keep their legs functional, they should be able to turn soft armor away from fire, and should have a stability bonus.

tors twisting in bipedals are not all the same...some can move in a greater arc then others.
as for quads.....some models might like the scorpion but in a smaller arc then the tighest bipedal twist
and then there are the ones like the goliath....no twisty at all...zero...zilch....if it aint in the forward arc thats it.
now whay in the name of all mecha that is wholey that quads as a rule dont have a frickin turret is beyond me.

 

[Prussian Havoc]

The Goliath can support a 360’ Torso Twist... it has a turret.

(MechArt by Malcadon)

 

[unclecid]

Ya o know it has something that looks like a turret.
But I've never found any thing that support s it having a working turret in TT.

 

[Prussian Havoc]

Ya o know it has something that looks like a turret.
But I've never found any thing that support s it having a working turret in TT.

My first introduction to the Goliath was this BattleTechnology Cover. The barrel and turret are to me, definitely offset from the Mech’s center line, thus we never questioned its turret functionality.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

Quads with no turrets really need to be ranged support.

In the case of the Scorpion, the PPC is just fine, but pull that SRM6 and put in LRMs. Yes, now it has minimums, but place it in or behind difficult terrain with cover, and now it can snipe with impunity.

 

[stjobe]

My first introduction to the Goliath was this BattleTechnology Cover. The barrel and turret are to me, definitely offset from the Mech’s center line, thus we never questioned its turret functionality.
View attachment 512593

Art is art and not rules. There exists no record sheets or fluff that I am aware of that has the Goliath mounting a turret. Refitting it with a turret would mean redesigning the 'Mech as the turret actuators take a crit slot (and adds some weight too IIRC).

The reason for it NOT having a turret is historical; the rules for turrets came later and were never retrofitted to the old designs.

 

[The Shadowhawke]

'Art is art'. Well, obviously with lot of the classic originals, particularly the Reseen, they had to judge tonnage, payload and general specs on the art.

And clearly the Goliath has a turret. They made the mistake early on in adding quads go the game, but without all they really needed to allow for their fundamental performance differences.

 

[stjobe]

'Art is art'.

"Art is not rules" is the take-away, not the truism that art is art. I do agree that the Goliath looks like it has a turret, but according to the rules and record sheet it does not have a turret.

That's all that I was saying.

 

[unclecid]

My first introduction to the Goliath was this BattleTechnology Cover. The barrel and turret are to me, definitely offset from the Mech’s center line, thus we never questioned its turret functionality.
View attachment 512593

so...what @stjobe was saying.
there is nothing in TT regarding the older quad designs that shows them having the 'gear' for turrets.
both the scorp and goliath should have one IMO, gut since there is nothing on their record sheets.....

"There are three varieties of Mech Turret. All Mech Turrets are built using the same rules as a Combat Vehicle. The weight rules still apply for any weapons mounted in said turret (the turret will weigh 1/10th the weight of the mounted weapons, rounded up to the next half ton). However, the turret is not an independent piece of the Mech and cannot be armored separately (outside of the Armored Components rule), nor does it have an internal structure value, it is only counted as a piece of the location it is mounted (Head, Shoulder, Torso). One critical hit must be allocated for the turning mechanism of the turret. If this receives a critical, the turret is jammed in the last position it was in. Weapons receive critical hits as though they are mounted normally on a standard Mech, they are mounted as normal in the piece of the mech mounting the turret, and explicitly tagged as being a part of the turret.

The Quad Battle Mech Turret is used explicitly on Quad BattleMech. It is capable of rotating 360 degrees, like a standard vehicle turret, with no downsides. The turret mechanism critical is placed in one of the torsos. This turret type cannot be mounted on a Bipedal Mech."

- Sarna

 

[Prussian Havoc]

'Art is art'. Well, obviously with lot of the classic originals, particularly the Reseen, they had to judge tonnage, payload and general specs on the art.

And clearly the Goliath has a turret. They made the mistake early on in adding quads go the game, but without all they really needed to allow for their fundamental performance differences.

And the Art was backed up by BattleTech fiction, ”Goliaths on St Andre” from that same SEP1988 issue of BattleTechnology:


Best of all it was a piece of fiction from Michael Stackpole, who even wrote himself into the article!!!



Back in 1988, we had no sarna.net.
We had MechArt.
We had MechFiction.
We had the early manuals.
That was enough, our gaming group did the rest.

 

[stjobe]

And the Art was backed up by BattleTech fiction, ”Goliaths on St Andre” from that same SEP1988 issue of BattleTechnology:
View attachment 512784

Best of all it was a piece of fiction from Michael Stackpole, who even wrote himself into the article!!!
View attachment 512785

BattleTechnology, good as it was, is explicitly non-canon (see sarna.net entry for "Canon").

Back in 1988, we had no sarna.net.
We had MechArt.
We had MechFiction.
We had the early manuals.
That was enough, our gaming group did the rest.

And that's all well enough; at your table, it's your rules. However, in the official rules the quads didn't have turrets.

The GOL-6M Goliath has as its description "This Goliath variant mounts a Gauss Rifle and MML-7 in an experimental BattleMech Turret", which lends further credence to the view that the standard Goliath indeed has no turret.