Forums of the Megaverse®

Okay,

the sad fact we all know is that Palladium lost the license to Robotech. This doesn't necessarily have to be the end for those that like the Palladium system. A good deal of work needs to be done to correct the godawful number of mistakes in the 2E version of the game. This is not JUST limited to game rules, but also nonsensical changes (looking at you UEEF Marines) and omitted mecha/vehicles/ships, etc. Of course, for many people Your Mileage May Vary regarding what to fix, etc.

So, I figured it would be worthwhile to call together all the various fans to post stuff they want/feel needs to be addressed by other fan contributors to partly fix this mess. What I don't want to hear ANYMORE is drek like "Well, we can't allow that cause Game Balance" or any variation of this crappy excuse. Screw game balance!

I'll post some stuff later today, but I wanted to start off this thread.

Off the top of my head, since my books are still in boxes from my move and the boxes were moved because my brother and his girlfriend have temporarily moved in as well, here's what I can think of:

-weapon ranges esp. the Macross main cannon which was given only half of it's range
-the lack of a listing for the pin-point barrier and the omni-directional barrier
-lack of character write-ups for Southern Cross
-franken mecha (seriously, there's no way you're going to get mecha weapons/equipment from the Macross Saga to fit the smaller Invid and Southern Cross mecha
-the Macross' missing torpedo tubes which are in the MDC by location table but don't actually have a description

-The DL Tractor Truck, king workhorse of the RDF heavy motorpool!

I've already rewritten the vast majority of mecha, vehicles, and ships, giving the ASC and Masters more due than they ever received in either edition of the official RPG publications.

jaymz wrote:I've already rewritten the vast majority of mecha, vehicles, and ships, giving the ASC and Masters more due than they ever received in either edition of the official RPG publications.

Good. The ASC arc got stuffed pretty badly by the fandom(rightly in some cases...I mean, a main battle tank/mecha with an exposed open cockpit?!"

While not on par with Destroids, Battloids are still effective. The VF's are good, and I even included Rabid's VF-7 along with the MODAT, Garland, and Hargun.

jaymz wrote:While not on par with Destroids, Battloids are still effective. The VF's are good, and I even included Rabid's VF-7 along with the MODAT, Garland, and Hargun.

I'm of the mind that Battloids are generally cheaper and less resource intensive to manufacture than Destroids, and thus could be manufactured more easily and in greater numbers. They were also more versatile with regards to utility work. Their main weaknesses, though, compared to the destroids, were a lack of heavy firepower and a smaller size that kept them from being able to wrestle full-sized Zentraedi, Because of the lack of radically different configurations, and a generally similar base design, Battloids were also easier to pilot, allowing trainees to be able to use cross-service models with a better base proficiency.

Yup pretty much

I'm also not terribly interested in the Garland Cyclones and variants anymore: between setting just how bad Robotech the Movie was, the fact that the other Megaroad 23 stuff wasn't any better, and the introduction of the “mini-tanks” in the Masters Saga supplement (I forget what they're called right now) to scratch my itch for ASC-era “cyclones” should I still wish to loosely adapt the events of RtM for the Shadow Chronicles universe, I'm fine without anything MR23-related.

But it's better to have and not need than vice versa.

Dataweaver - well I did up some of the old 1st ed stuff you could use as kept in use by the ASC that would fill the man sized PA niche.... (Tornado Combat Bike and Micronian PA)

dataweaver wrote:I the introduction of the “mini-tanks” in the Masters Saga supplement (I forget what they're called right now).

You mean the Myrmidon light hovertank?

The Myrmidon, yes. Sure, it's the size of a small car; but so was the Garland.

I'm also not terribly interested in most of the unique mecha from the RPG's first edition (excepting, ironically, the Instrumecha; I'll explain why if anyone cares). But again, its better to have and not need than vice versa.

What I do want are stats for the IMAI mecha that didn't get statted up in the UEEF Marines book, such as the Mospeada Battloids and the Vector (which I've considered using as an interim design between the Macross veritechs and the Alphas, which I prefer as a fairly recent design).

There was, interestingly enough, a Macross early storyboard design for a destroid/large battloid that had at least two torso swap-outs for a Tomahawk-like configuration and a Spartan-style form with two articulated hands, shoulder missile launchers, and a honking big gun pod. It looked lighter armored in the legs, but also faster.

A little tune up for they cyclone. The speed and its hitting power/HtH needs to go up a little to show more how it was like in the show, IMO. I'm ok with how they did MDC armor in the 2nd ed.

Except cyclones didn't have good firepower. You'll notice the only thing that ususlly worked was a missile to the sensor eye and that's about it.

jaymz wrote:While not on par with Destroids, Battloids are still effective. The VF's are good, and I even included Rabid's VF-7 along with the MODAT, Garland, and Hargun.

For their roles I do not expect Battloids to be on par with Destroids (or vise versa). They are designed for different roles. Battloids operate more like "infantry" and Destroids are "weapon platforms". Though I will admit some Battloids blur the line, especially some VTs in Battloid mode.

taalismn wrote:There was, interestingly enough, a Macross early storyboard design for a destroid/large battloid that had at least two torso swap-outs for a Tomahawk-like configuration and a Spartan-style form with two articulated hands, shoulder missile launchers, and a honking big gun pod. It looked lighter armored in the legs, but also faster.

I know what your thinking of (Masamune over at the uRRG).

One thing I find interesting in 2E IMU "generation" section was mention that the ASC Battloids had interchangeable arms. While I don't know how "canon" that statement is to RT proper, at least in terms of the 2E RPG-verse it does open up the possibility of ASC Destroids that swap out their stock arms for purpose build "destroid-ish" type arms (Monster, Phalanx, Defender, Tomahawk). They might not have the same performance as the RDF-era systems (beings smaller), but for their size...

I also have to wonder how "modular" the VHT-1's armshield weapons are. We know that the projectile cannon was swapped for an Ion cannon, so some level up changes would seem to be possible, maybe as unique models for different heavy combat roles.

Yeah, that was the point I was poorly making, in regards to the battloids, Shadow.

As for the interchangeable arms....yeah I could see some specialized arms being made with some sort of "backpack" for ammo storage and such.

Also, the VHT-1 Arm shields are likely quite modular. I have seen a similar variant to the myrmidon but instead being a heavy assault using two big guns (Ion I believe is the one saw). I don;t see why there couldn't be some one off or at least very limited use variations of armament (stripped down GU-11? single shorter barreled version of the defender auto-cannon?)

ShadowLogan wrote:[One thing I find interesting in 2E IMU "generation" section was mention that the ASC Battloids had interchangeable arms. While I don't know how "canon" that statement is to RT proper, at least in terms of the 2E RPG-verse it does open up the possibility of ASC Destroids that swap out their stock arms for purpose build "destroid-ish" type arms (Monster, Phalanx, Defender, Tomahawk). They might not have the same performance as the RDF-era systems (beings smaller), but for their size....

Start thinking of what you'd mount from available weapons for dedicated weapons arms. You could, for example, mount two or three infantry energy weapons with a powerplant hookup for an unlimited power supply. Lots of damage, but compared to tanks and the older Destroids, range is still going to suck.
Dunno whether you'd consider such a project a 'Bloc III' side program or an IMU kitbash.

jaymz wrote:As for the interchangeable arms....yeah I could see some specialized arms being made with some sort of "backpack" for ammo storage and such.

Also, the VHT-1 Arm shields are likely quite modular. I have seen a similar variant to the myrmidon but instead being a heavy assault using two big guns (Ion I believe is the one saw). I don;t see why there couldn't be some one off or at least very limited use variations of armament (stripped down GU-11? single shorter barreled version of the defender auto-cannon

Re: Battloid arms
Ammo backpacks might not even be required per say (though with Jump-packs being backmounted, and back mounted ammo bins that opens up an entire new class of "gunpod" for ASC battloids I would think).

You likely can get away with Phalanx type arm "bins" for both missiles and conventional projectiles (ala Defender). By size the RDF Phalanx arm's "bin" can fit multiple gunpods IINM, I once worked it out for an IMU. So an ASC "bin" purposely designed should also be possible I would think (and likely leave room for ammo, if projectile and not energy). Essentially the Tomahawk/Defender/Phalanx though could be replicated to some extent, and if the (2E) Jump-packs connection points can be repurposed for other roles...

Re: VHT
i know, I've seen a variant or two before. I've even done up variant weapon packages for the VHT. I was thinking in terms of 'official' though, fan wise yeah I can take it as being as modular as I want.

taalismn wrote:Start thinking of what you'd mount from available weapons for dedicated weapons arms. You could, for example, mount two or three infantry energy weapons with a powerplant hookup for an unlimited power supply. Lots of damage, but compared to tanks and the older Destroids, range is still going to suck.
Dunno whether you'd consider such a project a 'Bloc III' side program or an IMU kitbash.

I don't think infantry weapons would be the way to go. I'd expect to see heavier weaponry employed by VHTs or Destroids, either stock or derived. I was going to say just take the Sentinels Destroid arms from 1E, but most of them are to "tall" to really work, and don't have the 2E "version" (from Marines). Still adapting UEEF systems or UEDF:RDF-era systems seems doable, though maybe out of character for the ASC (given the lack of overlap w/those other two in-universe out of universe we know why this is true).

As for where the project falls, I'd say its less an IMU and more official (and lets be honest some of the IMU designs are less IMU and more "official" in disguise that have been come up with by fans and PB). As to why the ASC wasn't shown to use them, I chalk it up to off screen narrative (which seems to drive the Logan/ASC assesment at HG).

True about phalanx like pods as the "arms". There is a early model defender, called the matador-cal, had external bin pods iirc

The Sylphide and Condor as VERITECHS!

Both done on my wiki.

Vf-7 sylphid and vf-x-5-2 condor

Could you provide your wiki's URL?

Not here publicly no. Conversions etc are a no no on the forums and I'm not exactly on good terms with the admin here. I can via PM if you wish.

Please. Meanwhile, is that restriction still in place now that Palladium has lost the license?

Yes. It's Palladium's policy not to allow conversions of things they do not have a license to.

^what cam said, in addition to doing fan made mecha for said setting (see aforementioned VF-7 only having tech stats not game stats by Rabid quite some time ago)

Boooo, I was totally wanting to do a Robotech/Rifts/40K crossover! How can I do my conversions now?

^that is sarcasm...

I can say that jaymz has great "supplemental" material for Robotech

-STS

taalismn wrote:

jaymz wrote:While not on par with Destroids, Battloids are still effective. The VF's are good, and I even included Rabid's VF-7 along with the MODAT, Garland, and Hargun.

I'm of the mind that Battloids are generally cheaper and less resource intensive to manufacture than Destroids, and thus could be manufactured more easily and in greater numbers. They were also more versatile with regards to utility work. Their main weaknesses, though, compared to the destroids, were a lack of heavy firepower and a smaller size that kept them from being able to wrestle full-sized Zentraedi, Because of the lack of radically different configurations, and a generally similar base design, Battloids were also easier to pilot, allowing trainees to be able to use cross-service models with a better base proficiency.

Most of the Destroids couldn't hand-to-hand with full sized zents either. I am of the opinion that the Battloids were designed with a couple elements in mind;

1.) less resource intensive - they are smaller, use fewer weapons each, but manage to be nearly as physically tough. and by being less resource intensive it means you can build more of them. useful in a world where production during the time they were designed was rather more limited than it was before the war. (the factory sat probably fixed this, but hey, still a benefit)

2.) Tactically More Flexible - the gunpod based main firepower and focus on more utility based secondary weapons means they can (in theory at least) be tailored for various different battlefield roles just with a gunpod switch. plus since the specialist models rely on the gunpods for main firepower, you don't have as many problems if you get caught with the wrong models of battloid on hand. and by handing off roles like anti-air defense and missile based artillery to conventional vehicles as part of a combined arms doctrine, you end up with a more generalist mecha force.

3.) more adept at post-war peacekeeping.- their smaller size makes them less awkward in the urban areas of the surviving and rebuilt cities, let them coordinate with infantry better (thus making them more useful against bandits and other such groups), but they still have the firepower to take on zent footsoldiers and standard battlepods. the smaller size also makes them (slightly) less intimidating to the the civilians you are trying to protect, as does the fact they aren't walking arsenals able to level the entire city with one misaimed alpha strike.

4.) easier to transport - whether by spaceship, ocean ship, or aircraft, smaller lighter mecha mean that you can move more of them at a given time, making it quicker and easier to move forces around and deploy units to crisis zones. the fact that they rely heavily on energy weaponry as well means that logistics are somewhat simplified.. a Tomahawk or Spartan needs lots of missiles, as well as multiple types of ammunition for their machineguns, mortars, and flame throwers. add in the Defender's autocannons and the heavy missiles for the Phalanx (or the big guns of the Monster) and you have a lot of stuff you have to supply, most of it fairly bulky. a Salamander just needs minimissiles, and most of the other battloids just need minimissiles as well. so you can support more mecha off the same amount of cargo transfer capacity, or support the same number of mecha for longer between supply shipments. add in that most of the battloids seem to share a common base chassis design, and it is likely that many of the spare parts are similarly simplified in logistics.

slade the sniper wrote:Boooo, I was totally wanting to do a Robotech/Rifts/40K crossover! How can I do my conversions now?

^that is sarcasm...

I can say that jaymz has great "supplemental" material for Robotech

-STS

You can do that crossover....just go to my "resources"

glitterboy2098 wrote:Most of the Destroids couldn't hand-to-hand with full sized zents either.

... pretty much entirely for lack of anything resembling a hand, shin-kicking being singularly ineffective in life-or-death combat.

The MBR-04-Mk.I would probably have had a pretty easy time of it, basically being every bit as large and hefty as the Mk.VI Tomahawk mass production type but equipped with some nice robust hands for fisticuffs and wielding things like riot batons and gunpods.

glitterboy2098 wrote:1.) less resource intensive - they are smaller, use fewer weapons each, but manage to be nearly as physically tough. and by being less resource intensive it means you can build more of them. useful in a world where production during the time they were designed was rather more limited than it was before the war. (the factory sat probably fixed this, but hey, still a benefit)

2.) Tactically More Flexible - the gunpod based main firepower and focus on more utility based secondary weapons means they can (in theory at least) be tailored for various different battlefield roles just with a gunpod switch. plus since the specialist models rely on the gunpods for main firepower, you don't have as many problems if you get caught with the wrong models of battloid on hand. and by handing off roles like anti-air defense and missile based artillery to conventional vehicles as part of a combined arms doctrine, you end up with a more generalist mecha force.

With the obvious tradeoff being that the individual Battloid is much less effective on the battlefield, due to their reduced size and armament making them less effective in massed combat at range and close quarters and significantly less versatile with the absence of weapons capable of indirect fire and area clearance.

The sheer number of different designs that all do more or less the exact same job is also a big logistical deficit as well. One all-regime design would've been more efficient than a dozen different ones engineered for specific types of terrain, but by this point in Robotech's history the military owns the military-industrial complex and is calling the shots itself.

glitterboy2098 wrote:3.) more adept at post-war peacekeeping.- their smaller size makes them less awkward in the urban areas of the surviving and rebuilt cities, let them coordinate with infantry better (thus making them more useful against bandits and other such groups), but they still have the firepower to take on zent footsoldiers and standard battlepods. the smaller size also makes them (slightly) less intimidating to the the civilians you are trying to protect, as does the fact they aren't walking arsenals able to level the entire city with one misaimed alpha strike.

Their smaller size would make them more readily able to safely maneuver in numbers through a city, but at the same time nobody really wants platoon-sized formations of giant robots swarming the streets either... since it just increases the possibility that someone or something is going to get stepped on that oughtn't. The loss of close combat ability is likely a major detriment to peacekeeping between the first and second war, since a 6m-tall robot isn't going to be much of a threat to a 10m-tall Zentradi in close combat... the Zentradi just need to kick them over and step on them.

glitterboy2098 wrote:4.) easier to transport - whether by spaceship, ocean ship, or aircraft, smaller lighter mecha mean that you can move more of them at a given time, making it quicker and easier to move forces around and deploy units to crisis zones. the fact that they rely heavily on energy weaponry as well means that logistics are somewhat simplified.

But, at the same time, you NEED to transport more of them to achieve the same results you'd get from a smaller number of Destroids because they're not as versatile and are much less heavily armed.

glitterboy2098 wrote:add in that most of the battloids seem to share a common base chassis design, and it is likely that many of the spare parts are similarly simplified in logistics.

Three of the five Destroids (the Tomahawk, Defender, and Phalanx) can make the same boast, but without having to assume... all Series 04 destroids share a common powertrain and frame.

dataweaver wrote:I'm also not terribly interested in most of the unique mecha from the RPG's first edition (excepting, ironically, the Instrumecha; I'll explain why if anyone cares). But again, its better to have and not need than vice versa.

Ok... You get my attention. How could you possibly plug this into a game without it turning into a laughing out loud contest?
That and the car mecha from the 1st Ed are basically the only stuff I didn't bother to augment at 2nd edition power levels. (That I could find information about...)

For my part, catering to the needs of my Gm in order to speed up the game preparation process, I have tackled the following issues.
(Then again... no stat posting permitted, so... sorry if this sounds too much like a boast. It is more intended on the tone of the admiration felt while first reading the whole material produced by palladium. Never before had I worked so long before even beginning a game. I guess I was more preoccupied with feeling I had a completed product, instead of seeing it as missing stuff.)



Most stuff mentioned had to be cross-corrected to fit the power scale of the 2nd ed. What was based on internet published material was generally done for the 1st, and some I had to build from scratch. (Calculating the Invid Starfish by images from the comics and comparison to other ships was kinda challenging. It ended up so powerful that the "living ship" theory - born of the same source pictures leaving a distinct starfish sphincter on - lead to a scaling rule in order to adapt it and thus fill the ranks of Invid Space Battle with diversity... a rather large issue with published only material.)
Which leaves the following things to be done :

• Understanding how we are supposed to apply alignment to animals. Some issues aren't really clear...
• A lot of ASC / Master trucks and civilian vehicles were sadly unavailable. Not knowing where to begin, I most regretfully left the work undone for my Gm to imagine.
• A lot of Macross Era military transports and civilian vehicles were also sadly hard to come by. Like the previous line, these are rarely seen more than a few seconds and sometime don't even show up on Macross sites.
• I really wish we had more information available on the alien vehicles and spaceships. Notably the Karbarrans who have a rule to use Sekiton as fuel but no vehicles to use it in. There was some designs which started to show up on Mecha Journal when I just thought I was over and had sent my PDF to my Gm; however, statements being made on this forum led me to believe these had probably no link to Robotech whatsoever. And considering the difficulty (read : a pile of cross referencing to do) in converting from fictional descriptive only... Plus... without permission or a place to distribute all this afterwards; around a year of spare-time work doesn't seem like a good thing to plan a second time.
• Any idea of how to interpret economy as per the different locales of the setting? There is a bit of input from the 1st edition, and from the New Gen sourcebook (or was it Genesis Pit?) but nowhere near as to be able to make one a clear idea of what is going on with the pay-grades.
• Character sheets : Should include more space for the H-t-H manoeuvres. A square for equipment and a much developed space for armour would also be nice. Plus... The Mecha part of the sheet doesn't really fits the number of "Locations" to clearly input M.D.C. Except if I'm to believe that only damage should be written, and not the whole MDC statistics in prevention of damages. Nonetheless, this will probably be done prior to us leaving the prequel of GCW to enter the more official timeline. Would that also be restricted from posting?
• Gm Screen... I thought one would have had already been made, but I didn't found one. Probably from the stat publication interdiction. Since we haven't started our game yet, it is hard to tell what should be on one of those. If you have made one yourself, or wished you had one, what would be on it?

In that last regard... I guess I did go the way the first post here wanted it.

Rabid Southern Cross Fan wrote:So, I figured it would be worthwhile to call together all the various fans to post stuff they want/feel needs to be addressed by other fan contributors to partly fix this mess. What I don't want to hear ANYMORE is drek like "Well, we can't allow that cause Game Balance" or any variation of this crappy excuse. Screw game balance!

Which is to say that I simply took all the palladium information as correct (except when conflicting with itself because of typos) and scaled the rest from there.
To be fair, most looked like it made sense to me, despite online comments to the contrary.
But we'll probably find some more by playing when we finally get to that.
I'm still anxious that I might have rendered the MODATs too weak by trying to conceive of damage related penalties while keeping the logic of how it's mechanism would transform. Then again, fanon including them usually has them decimated by the Invid at the first occasion.