Robotech Tactics Mecha

[Sambot]

Does anyone know why the Jotun Armored Valkyie, the YF-4 Valkyrie, Tenesta-Regult Battle Pod, Nousgarma-ger Power Armor, Queadlunn-gult Power Armor, the Phalanx variant, and the Destroid Command Module never made it into the RPG?

[taalismn]

Probably Ninja Division licensing,,,they came up with proprietary stuff they weren't willing to share with Palladium so as to make the Tactics game more of an entity on its own right and not an extension of the Palladium RPG.

[Sambot]

Probably Ninja Division licensing,,,they came up with proprietary stuff they weren't willing to share with Palladium so as to make the Tactics game more of an entity on its own right and not an extension of the Palladium RPG.

Okay...I guess I could see that if Palladium wasn't producing Robotech Tactics. Even if that were the case, the Jotun Valkyrie and the YF-4 were in Macross so should be available for Palladium to use. Only they didn't.

Thanks

[ShadowLogan]

Does anyone know why the Jotun Armored Valkyie, the YF-4 Valkyrie, Tenesta-Regult Battle Pod, Nousgarma-ger Power Armor, Queadlunn-gult Power Armor, the Phalanx variant, and the Destroid Command Module never made it into the RPG?

The YF-4 Valkyrie, in a fleshed out form, never made it into the 2e RPG proper since at the time it was a prototype and had not entered production (we're probably talking less than 12 units for the prototype stage). See the Alpha Entry in the main TSC book (Mar. 2008).

The Jotun likely never made it in to the Macross SB (@ the time, Oct. 2008) for any number of reasons: space, due to potential licensing issues in using the Orguss design, HG did not approve it (the 1st x3 2E titles where much more tightly managed than Marines and the NG/Invid titles).

The other units (along w/the 2x VFs) did not make it in because they likely did not exist at the time of the Macross SB's writing and none of them fit with any of the books to make it into production around the time of RPG Tactics launch (Nov. 2014 launch, the last RPG book was UEEF Marines is a 2015 title and the two prior ones where NG/Invid related). And yes the YF-4 is officially referenced and used prior to this, but I don't think HG had any real idea on how it transformed (licensing rights) or other specifics (just look at the RT.com infopedia article, compared to other entries it's pretty much a "redacted" document).

I didn't get into the Tactics line, but I thought there where supposed to be rules to convert between Tactics Game Mechanical Stat Blocks and the RPG Game Mechanical Stat Blocks? Or was that planned for a later supplement?

[xunk16]

I didn't get into the Tactics line, but I thought there where supposed to be rules to convert between Tactics Game Mechanical Stat Blocks and the RPG Game Mechanical Stat Blocks? Or was that planned for a later supplement?

There are rules to make a Miniature with stats loosely related to a character from the RPG. The reverse though, making a character from the miniature game into the RPG, would possibly asks for a major thinking through ending up more house-rule than game. Furthermore, these are more about creating pilots than the mecha themselves. So officially there isn't rules to convert missing mecha. You can try to guesstimate it from common material, but that's it.

[jaymz]

I didn't get into the Tactics line, but I thought there where supposed to be rules to convert between Tactics Game Mechanical Stat Blocks and the RPG Game Mechanical Stat Blocks? Or was that planned for a later supplement?

Best you can do is a bit of reverse engineering but that'll just get you some very basic stats to work with at best.

[ShadowLogan]

Best you can do is a bit of reverse engineering but that'll just get you some very basic stats to work with at best.

And I would suspect even those stats are going to be subjective the closer one gets to a pure "new" design like YF-4 instead of a variant like the Regults and Z-PAs and Destroids which likely could just be considered/created via the existing IMU rules unlike the pure designs (Jotun being something in between, depending on how its background was handled).

Thanks.

[jaymz]

No what I mean is there was an actual conversion ratio for mdc, speed, and weapon damage. Weapon range was a bit more...abstract.

[glitterboy2098]

i suspect that PB intended to provide stats for those mecha in a future RPG book.. but because of how the RTT affair ended up going, new RPG books just never materialized before the license got yanked.

[ShadowLogan]

No what I mean is there was an actual conversion ratio for mdc, speed, and weapon damage. Weapon range was a bit more...abstract.

Okay, roughly on par with the SDC:MDC conversion rules in RCB1r with regard to tech with AR being a bit subjective then?

[jaymz]

https://robotechrpgtactics.boards.net/t ... ch-tactics

[jaymz]

That fan proboard is where some of us figured out how to do some of the stuff as we were the vetting pool to do just that after wave 1 shipped. We were the group of people that also got the blast rule changed, the faq, and the never published conventional forces rules done.

[Sambot]

Does anyone know why the Jotun Armored Valkyie, the YF-4 Valkyrie, Tenesta-Regult Battle Pod, Nousgarma-ger Power Armor, Queadlunn-gult Power Armor, the Phalanx variant, and the Destroid Command Module never made it into the RPG?

The YF-4 Valkyrie, in a fleshed out form, never made it into the 2e RPG proper since at the time it was a prototype and had not entered production (we're probably talking less than 12 units for the prototype stage). See the Alpha Entry in the main TSC book (Mar. 2008).

The Jotun likely never made it in to the Macross SB (@ the time, Oct. 2008) for any number of reasons: space, due to potential licensing issues in using the Orguss design, HG did not approve it (the 1st x3 2E titles where much more tightly managed than Marines and the NG/Invid titles).

The other units (along w/the 2x VFs) did not make it in because they likely did not exist at the time of the Macross SB's writing and none of them fit with any of the books to make it into production around the time of RPG Tactics launch (Nov. 2014 launch, the last RPG book was UEEF Marines is a 2015 title and the two prior ones where NG/Invid related). And yes the YF-4 is officially referenced and used prior to this, but I don't think HG had any real idea on how it transformed (licensing rights) or other specifics (just look at the RT.com infopedia article, compared to other entries it's pretty much a "redacted" document).

The YF-4 being a prototype shouldn't stop anyone from using it. Palladium's had prototypes in Robotech before. That there wasn't a book available to put it in makes more sense.

I didn't get into the Tactics line, but I thought there where supposed to be rules to convert between Tactics Game Mechanical Stat Blocks and the RPG Game Mechanical Stat Blocks? Or was that planned for a later supplement?

I wanted to but couldn't afford it. There's some rules to convert from the RPG to Tactics but not the other way around.

i suspect that PB intended to provide stats for those mecha in a future RPG book.. but because of how the RTT affair ended up going, new RPG books just never materialized before the license got yanked.

It is a shame with how RTT and the RPG ended up.

[ShadowLogan]

Does anyone know why the Jotun Armored Valkyie, the YF-4 Valkyrie, Tenesta-Regult Battle Pod, Nousgarma-ger Power Armor, Queadlunn-gult Power Armor, the Phalanx variant, and the Destroid Command Module never made it into the RPG?

The YF-4 Valkyrie, in a fleshed out form, never made it into the 2e RPG proper since at the time it was a prototype and had not entered production (we're probably talking less than 12 units for the prototype stage). See the Alpha Entry in the main TSC book (Mar. 2008).

The Jotun likely never made it in to the Macross SB (@ the time, Oct. 2008) for any number of reasons: space, due to potential licensing issues in using the Orguss design, HG did not approve it (the 1st x3 2E titles where much more tightly managed than Marines and the NG/Invid titles).

The other units (along w/the 2x VFs) did not make it in because they likely did not exist at the time of the Macross SB's writing and none of them fit with any of the books to make it into production around the time of RPG Tactics launch (Nov. 2014 launch, the last RPG book was UEEF Marines is a 2015 title and the two prior ones where NG/Invid related). And yes the YF-4 is officially referenced and used prior to this, but I don't think HG had any real idea on how it transformed (licensing rights) or other specifics (just look at the RT.com infopedia article, compared to other entries it's pretty much a "redacted" document).

The YF-4 being a prototype shouldn't stop anyone from using it. Palladium's had prototypes in Robotech before. That there wasn't a book available to put it in makes more sense.

From using it, no. The question with the "prototypes" though is how many should be available/reasonable to see in a campaign and in what context.

Palladium has done prototypes in the past (1E), though I don't think they actually qualify as prototypes the way they are introduced for use (from the fluff, well Book 8's, Book 6r's might be more appropriate). 2E's IMUs aren't much different in a sense either, as this class is supposed to be "one-off" kit-bash jobs, but really are "shadow" production models to expand the TO&E for the setting when you get down to it.

[taalismn]

[
Palladium has done prototypes in the past (1E), though I don't think they actually qualify as prototypes the way they are introduced for use (from the fluff, well Book 8's, Book 6r's might be more appropriate). 2E's IMUs aren't much different in a sense either, as this class is supposed to be "one-off" kit-bash jobs, but really are "shadow" production models to expand the TO&E for the setting when you get down to it.

I loved those Strike Force oddballs....and the RoTM 'lost' types..oh, beloved Striker and TC Recon battloids and the SuperLogan....

[jaymz]

Yeah Strike Force really did sort of fill the "gaps" in a way but as much as I love the striker et al for RotM revised, their stories just didn't really match up well with the established timelines in some ways.

[Sambot]

Does anyone know why the Jotun Armored Valkyie, the YF-4 Valkyrie, Tenesta-Regult Battle Pod, Nousgarma-ger Power Armor, Queadlunn-gult Power Armor, the Phalanx variant, and the Destroid Command Module never made it into the RPG?

The YF-4 Valkyrie, in a fleshed out form, never made it into the 2e RPG proper since at the time it was a prototype and had not entered production (we're probably talking less than 12 units for the prototype stage). See the Alpha Entry in the main TSC book (Mar. 2008).

The Jotun likely never made it in to the Macross SB (@ the time, Oct. 2008) for any number of reasons: space, due to potential licensing issues in using the Orguss design, HG did not approve it (the 1st x3 2E titles where much more tightly managed than Marines and the NG/Invid titles).

The other units (along w/the 2x VFs) did not make it in because they likely did not exist at the time of the Macross SB's writing and none of them fit with any of the books to make it into production around the time of RPG Tactics launch (Nov. 2014 launch, the last RPG book was UEEF Marines is a 2015 title and the two prior ones where NG/Invid related). And yes the YF-4 is officially referenced and used prior to this, but I don't think HG had any real idea on how it transformed (licensing rights) or other specifics (just look at the RT.com infopedia article, compared to other entries it's pretty much a "redacted" document).

The YF-4 being a prototype shouldn't stop anyone from using it. Palladium's had prototypes in Robotech before. That there wasn't a book available to put it in makes more sense.

From using it, no. The question with the "prototypes" though is how many should be available/reasonable to see in a campaign and in what context.

Palladium has done prototypes in the past (1E), though I don't think they actually qualify as prototypes the way they are introduced for use (from the fluff, well Book 8's, Book 6r's might be more appropriate). 2E's IMUs aren't much different in a sense either, as this class is supposed to be "one-off" kit-bash jobs, but really are "shadow" production models to expand the TO&E for the setting when you get down to it.

That is the question is it a one off, a limited production for testing, or did it go straight into production, something else? Whatever the answer is, it can't be used if we don't have stats for it. Personally, I think players will use it however they want in their games. I often use the Return of the Masters prototypes as production mecha because their too cool to keep as one offs. That doesn't stop those in the scenario from being prototypes but it does give me more toys to play with in other games.

Yeah Strike Force really did sort of fill the "gaps" in a way but as much as I love the striker et al for RotM revised, their stories just didn't really match up well with the established timelines in some ways.

True. That's why I tend to do my own thing with them. And at least we have them. There's other designs that we don't have and I wish we did.

[ShadowLogan]

That is the question is it a one off, a limited production for testing, or did it go straight into production, something else? Whatever the answer is, it can't be used if we don't have stats for it. Personally, I think players will use it however they want in their games. I often use the Return of the Masters prototypes as production mecha because their too cool to keep as one offs. That doesn't stop those in the scenario from being prototypes but it does give me more toys to play with in other games.

Prototypes, at least for real world equivalents of mecha, are not going to be produced in significant numbers IMHO for testing (likely around what you can count on your both hands), even at the EMD phase (EMD= Engineering and Manufacturing Development) and I would think it would be very unlikely to send an EMD unit into combat if it was still in EMD. If you where to see an EMD/prototype sent into combat it's either because someone is desperate (Gloval sending Rick to rescue the shuttle with the VF-1's fastpacks) or it's an accident with a bit of luck thrown in to be viable(Rick using the YF-4 in FTS comic/gn, or Roy with the YF-1), and not all EMDs are created equal. That is why I say Palladium's "prototypes" are actually "shadow" production units in 1E.

And I have to disagree that if it is doesn't have stats we can't use it. It is possible to develop the stats on one's own, though they could still be different than what someone else could develop for the same example. And everyone has house rule changes to the RPG, I don't think it could be considered a palladium game without some house rules and changes (even if that is to just the background stuff).

Yeah Strike Force really did sort of fill the "gaps" in a way but as much as I love the striker et al for RotM revised, their stories just didn't really match up well with the established timelines in some ways.

I don't think Bk8 or Bk6r units have to "fit" the TV series timeline or the Novel or Comic timelines, they just have to work with the 1E RPG's timeline which by necessity has to be vague to allow GMs some freedom. Some of the units might also be for specific scenario options for the campaign (ex. while BK8's campaign module was set for pre-SDF-3 launch IINM, but they also included notes for other settings where the VT car makes more sense being in existence given it was to address issues with the Cyclone specifically against the Invid).

I loved those Strike Force oddballs....and the RoTM 'lost' types..oh, beloved Striker and TC Recon battloids and the SuperLogan....

The only unit between Bk8 or Bk6r that I didn't like was the VT Car's graphic depictions, I didn't have much of an issue with the Back Ground Fluff or Stats (MRMs might be a bit much though and how to fit 5 guys into it), it was the depiction. It looked to much like a VF-1 when it didn't have to be (plus the cockpit modules don't appear to line up IMHO), what would have been wrong with using the VHT* or Logan as the basis?.

*I can see the hover system replaced with a wheel system on the legs, arm shields acting as weapon pods (one for the missiles, one for its beam cannon) and dropping the EU-11 and (B-mode) tailcoat area for a open-air or enclosed cargo/passenger bed (think pickup truck), with the unit driving in "reverse" using a bubble canopy for the drivers station in vehicle mode.

[Sambot]

That is the question is it a one off, a limited production for testing, or did it go straight into production, something else? Whatever the answer is, it can't be used if we don't have stats for it. Personally, I think players will use it however they want in their games. I often use the Return of the Masters prototypes as production mecha because their too cool to keep as one offs. That doesn't stop those in the scenario from being prototypes but it does give me more toys to play with in other games.

Prototypes, at least for real world equivalents of mecha, are not going to be produced in significant numbers IMHO for testing (likely around what you can count on your both hands), even at the EMD phase (EMD= Engineering and Manufacturing Development) and I would think it would be very unlikely to send an EMD unit into combat if it was still in EMD. If you where to see an EMD/prototype sent into combat it's either because someone is desperate (Gloval sending Rick to rescue the shuttle with the VF-1's fastpacks) or it's an accident with a bit of luck thrown in to be viable(Rick using the YF-4 in FTS comic/gn, or Roy with the YF-1), and not all EMDs are created equal. That is why I say Palladium's "prototypes" are actually "shadow" production units in 1E.

I suppose it depends on the circumstances. Prototypes do get tested in combat. I think the EMD unit waits behind the lines though. A military crew does the testing and reports back to the EMD unit about how the item functioned. Then depending on the reports the item gets tweaked or not and production starts.

And I have to disagree that if it is doesn't have stats we can't use it. It is possible to develop the stats on one's own, though they could still be different than what someone else could develop for the same example. And everyone has house rule changes to the RPG, I don't think it could be considered a palladium game without some house rules and changes (even if that is to just the background stuff).

Sure we can make our own stats or use someone else's. I've used a lot of stats that were posted online. The problem is, at least for me, if I don't have them with me or have used them a lot, I forget about them.

Yeah Strike Force really did sort of fill the "gaps" in a way but as much as I love the striker et al for RotM revised, their stories just didn't really match up well with the established timelines in some ways.

I don't think Bk8 or Bk6r units have to "fit" the TV series timeline or the Novel or Comic timelines, they just have to work with the 1E RPG's timeline which by necessity has to be vague to allow GMs some freedom. Some of the units might also be for specific scenario options for the campaign (ex. while BK8's campaign module was set for pre-SDF-3 launch IINM, but they also included notes for other settings where the VT car makes more sense being in existence given it was to address issues with the Cyclone specifically against the Invid).

Even with that note, the VT Car could have write up that fit the setting better. As is, it really stick out as being out of place.

I loved those Strike Force oddballs....and the RoTM 'lost' types..oh, beloved Striker and TC Recon battloids and the SuperLogan....

The only unit between Bk8 or Bk6r that I didn't like was the VT Car's graphic depictions, I didn't have much of an issue with the Back Ground Fluff or Stats (MRMs might be a bit much though and how to fit 5 guys into it), it was the depiction. It looked to much like a VF-1 when it didn't have to be (plus the cockpit modules don't appear to line up IMHO), what would have been wrong with using the VHT* or Logan as the basis?.

*I can see the hover system replaced with a wheel system on the legs, arm shields acting as weapon pods (one for the missiles, one for its beam cannon) and dropping the EU-11 and (B-mode) tailcoat area for a open-air or enclosed cargo/passenger bed (think pickup truck), with the unit driving in "reverse" using a bubble canopy for the drivers station in vehicle mode.

I have more issues with the fluff than I do the art or stats. For me the fluff just doesn't work. I get what the creator was trying to do but the dimensions don't work with the fluff. The VT Car is only 6.6 feet wide in car mode. The cockpit area is about a third of the VT Car's total width. That's about 2.5-3 feet. There's no way you're getting three people sitting side by side in a back seat, and a passenger riding shotgun. The cockpit just isn't big enough. It'd be like trying to fit 4 passengers into a Formula-1 Race Car's cabin and a Cyclone in the trunk. There just isn't room. For me, the VT Car is a single seat vehicle. (Fun fact, not including the latter's wingspan, the LRV-588 Veritech Car is smaller than Triax's X-6000 Transformable Sub.)

For me, I think of the VT Car as the first second generation ground veritech. The first generation being the Centaur HT. My head canon has it being heavily inspired by the VF-1. (Same design team maybe?) I have it being designed for civil, and shipboard, defense. The VT Car's small size and speed would let it move around cities and the interior of ships, a lot easier and faster than a Destroid or Battloid. The draw back is that it doesn't handle rough terrain very well do it's small ground clearance. That drawback would lead to using a hover system. The end result would be the Spartas VHT. The VT Car would still be in use in cities, and on ships, but it's production would be far lower than the following VHTs. And since it's used on ships, it'd be available to the REF and able to accompany Cyclones in some terrain. At least that's how my head canon has it.

[ShadowLogan]

Even with that note, the VT Car could have write up that fit the setting better. As is, it really stick out as being out of place.

I do think it fits specific variations of the campaign module, but not the primary one the module was written as (set during Macross Saga's rebuilding phase, pre-Sentinels launch). I will grant there are other ways to have done the background that would have been more flexible (I could see it as an ASC unit for the GMP with the right looks, or for some of the other ASC branches like the REP or Desert Patrol or CD in 1E).

I have more issues with the fluff than I do the art or stats. For me the fluff just doesn't work. I get what the creator was trying to do but the dimensions don't work with the fluff. The VT Car is only 6.6 feet wide in car mode. The cockpit area is about a third of the VT Car's total width. That's about 2.5-3 feet. There's no way you're getting three people sitting side by side in a back seat, and a passenger riding shotgun. The cockpit just isn't big enough. It'd be like trying to fit 4 passengers into a Formula-1 Race Car's cabin and a Cyclone in the trunk. There just isn't room. For me, the VT Car is a single seat vehicle. (Fun fact, not including the latter's wingspan, the LRV-588 Veritech Car is smaller than Triax's X-6000 Transformable Sub.)

I would point out that the estimate of the cockpit/cab area is based on the graphic depiction, which is what I have issue with. Without it you would not know the cab/cockpit is ~1/3 the width which is the cause with the seating issue, though it should be pointed out at 6.6ft that is wide enough to do the job absent any graphical depiction, nor do they say how comfortable those 3 in the back seat would be. It's that or the cockpit/cab is not being properly identified.

As for getting 3 people sitting in the "backseat" like that, easy: just have the "backseat" run perpendicular to the driver seat (which is what I think they where going for in the art, used by trucks carrying soldiers in their bed). Shotgun seat you're on your own.

[Sambot]

Even with that note, the VT Car could have write up that fit the setting better. As is, it really stick out as being out of place.

I do think it fits specific variations of the campaign module, but not the primary one the module was written as (set during Macross Saga's rebuilding phase, pre-Sentinels launch). I will grant there are other ways to have done the background that would have been more flexible (I could see it as an ASC unit for the GMP with the right looks, or for some of the other ASC branches like the REP or Desert Patrol or CD in 1E).

The VT Car being a ASC mecha is an interesting thought. I could see it being used by the GMP and the CD.

I have more issues with the fluff than I do the art or stats. For me the fluff just doesn't work. I get what the creator was trying to do but the dimensions don't work with the fluff. The VT Car is only 6.6 feet wide in car mode. The cockpit area is about a third of the VT Car's total width. That's about 2.5-3 feet. There's no way you're getting three people sitting side by side in a back seat, and a passenger riding shotgun. The cockpit just isn't big enough. It'd be like trying to fit 4 passengers into a Formula-1 Race Car's cabin and a Cyclone in the trunk. There just isn't room. For me, the VT Car is a single seat vehicle. (Fun fact, not including the latter's wingspan, the LRV-588 Veritech Car is smaller than Triax's X-6000 Transformable Sub.)

I would point out that the estimate of the cockpit/cab area is based on the graphic depiction, which is what I have issue with. Without it you would not know the cab/cockpit is ~1/3 the width which is the cause with the seating issue, though it should be pointed out at 6.6ft that is wide enough to do the job absent any graphical depiction, nor do they say how comfortable those 3 in the back seat would be. It's that or the cockpit/cab is not being properly identified.

As for getting 3 people sitting in the "backseat" like that, easy: just have the "backseat" run perpendicular to the driver seat (which is what I think they where going for in the art, used by trucks carrying soldiers in their bed). Shotgun seat you're on your own.

If we didn't have art, sure. Then the 6.6ft width might work but it'd still be very tight. We do have art though and going by the art, the VT Car isn't big enough. The dimensions work for the art but not the description of 5 people being in the cockpit.

3 people sitting perpendicular might work with different artwork but not with what we have. The cockpit section is about half the length of the VT Car. That's 9 ft. 9 ft is about the minimum needed for very cramped seating in that arrangement. Then you've got the controls and seats, along with the body of the vehicle. There's also needs to be room for the mecha's head, arms and ion cannon. I don't see how passengers would fit unless the passenger is sitting on the driver's lap.

[ShadowLogan]

The VT Car being a ASC mecha is an interesting thought. I could see it being used by the GMP and the CD.

IIRC I have or had a writeup(s) for a mecha variation for this idea that I did a long time ago and never really used.

If we didn't have art, sure. Then the 6.6ft width might work but it'd still be very tight. We do have art though and going by the art, the VT Car isn't big enough. The dimensions work for the art but not the description of 5 people being in the cockpit.

At 6.6ft wide, the VT car is not dissimilar to real world cars (when Bk8 was written, and I believe also today) and you can get 5 people in. Some real world car width's:
-1992 Cavlier: ~5.5ft
-1992 Sunbird: ~5.5ft
-1992 Corolla: ~5.4ft
-1992 Sable: ~5.9ft
-WW2 American Jeep: ~5.2ft (listed capacity is 3-4)
-1992 Ford F-250/150 Trucks: ~6.6ft (no backseat)
-1992 Ford Ranger Truck: ~5.6ft (no backseat)
-1992 Chevy Van: ~6.6ft
-School bus: ~7.5ft (x2 person per seat and x2 seats across plus walkway single file)

So if we ignore the artwork and just work with the stated dimensions, there is plenty of precedent for getting 5 guys into a vehicle with that width or smaller in the real world in two ranks. So the dimensions are not the issue.

The entire issue with squeezing 5 people in is the result of the artwork depiction. Which as I've said is what I see as a major problem with in regard to this unit. Toss out the art work and there really isn't any issue squeezing in 5 guys if you don't know what it looks like.

[taalismn]

[
The entire issue with squeezing 5 people in is the result of the artwork depiction. Which as I've said is what I see as a major problem with in regard to this unit. Toss out the art work and there really isn't any issue squeezing in 5 guys if you don't know what it looks like.

Veritech Stuffing: No longer permitted by the RDF.

"FOKKKKKEEERRRRR!!!!"

[ShadowLogan]

[
The entire issue with squeezing 5 people in is the result of the artwork depiction. Which as I've said is what I see as a major problem with in regard to this unit. Toss out the art work and there really isn't any issue squeezing in 5 guys if you don't know what it looks like.

Veritech Stuffing: No longer permitted by the RDF.

"FOKKKKKEEERRRRR!!!!"

Well Fokker does hold the record for squeezing in the most people into an enclosed vehicle (several actually) on Macross Island (of course this was before getting serious with Grant).

[Sambot]

The VT Car being a ASC mecha is an interesting thought. I could see it being used by the GMP and the CD.

IIRC I have or had a writeup(s) for a mecha variation for this idea that I did a long time ago and never really used.

If we didn't have art, sure. Then the 6.6ft width might work but it'd still be very tight. We do have art though and going by the art, the VT Car isn't big enough. The dimensions work for the art but not the description of 5 people being in the cockpit.

At 6.6ft wide, the VT car is not dissimilar to real world cars (when Bk8 was written, and I believe also today) and you can get 5 people in. Some real world car width's:
-1992 Cavlier: ~5.5ft
-1992 Sunbird: ~5.5ft
-1992 Corolla: ~5.4ft
-1992 Sable: ~5.9ft
-WW2 American Jeep: ~5.2ft (listed capacity is 3-4)
-1992 Ford F-250/150 Trucks: ~6.6ft (no backseat)
-1992 Ford Ranger Truck: ~5.6ft (no backseat)
-1992 Chevy Van: ~6.6ft
-School bus: ~7.5ft (x2 person per seat and x2 seats across plus walkway single file)

So if we ignore the artwork and just work with the stated dimensions, there is plenty of precedent for getting 5 guys into a vehicle with that width or smaller in the real world in two ranks. So the dimensions are not the issue.

The entire issue with squeezing 5 people in is the result of the artwork depiction. Which as I've said is what I see as a major problem with in regard to this unit. Toss out the art work and there really isn't any issue squeezing in 5 guys if you don't know what it looks like.

If we throw out the artwork, sure, the stated width might work. We can get three people per seat in my truck. Depending on their size of course. If we go about disregarding the art, the VF-1 can carry a platoon of infantry. I don't think we're going to toss the art for the VF-1 though. I'm not sure we should with the VT Car either. I think it'd be easier, and maybe better, to change the fluff. We're already given permission to do so a couple pages earlier.

[
The entire issue with squeezing 5 people in is the result of the artwork depiction. Which as I've said is what I see as a major problem with in regard to this unit. Toss out the art work and there really isn't any issue squeezing in 5 guys if you don't know what it looks like.

Veritech Stuffing: No longer permitted by the RDF.

"FOKKKKKEEERRRRR!!!!"

Only when on active duty.

Wasn't Veritech stuffing one of the events happening during the SDF-1's launch celebration?

[glitterboy2098]

given the veritech car isn't really related to robotech tactics, perhaps discussion of it could be taken to another thread?

as far as the RTT tactics stuff goes.. the zentreadi ones are somewhat easy to stat up. the Artillery Pod with the particle beam cannons appear to mount the same weapons as the dorsal gun on the Glaug Officer Pod, the male Power armor with the missiles seem to be mounting the light artillery pod's launchers instead of the normal should plasma cannon, and the female power armor variant seems to sarifice the shoulder missile launchers for a pair of PBC's like those off the battlepod. personally for me that last one is the most tricky given it is actually a downgrade over the missiles.. but i personally would give those guns the same automatic targeting rules that the VF-1R's head autocannon has, making the resulting suit a point defense suit within a unit of quadronos, for the shooting down of incoming missiles/kamikaze's even while the warrior inside engages with their forearm guns or leg missiles. (which in combination with the heavier missile payload of the standard suit, would have been very good at anti-invid operations. and the automatic guns would give their battle-sister's cover during a withdrawal to reload.)

the UEDF mecha require more custom writing, but i tend to assume the 'orguss armor' has main body armor bonus similar to the regular armored VF, while the arms, legs, and thruster pack are literally just super VF Fast pack parts. which i s why i tend to assume this armor was designed primarily for more offensive space operations. (which the standard armored VF can do, but it's rather ponderous and not very agile.)

the YF-4 pretty much has to be written whole cloth, though i tend to assume its flight performance is at minimum comparable to a VF with the full FAST pack array, which not only explaisn why it was considered as a replacement, but also why it ended up being too complex and hard to maintain. (to this end i would also give it the same 'fly by wire' bonuses in fighter mode as the VF-1, instead of adding a lesser version of those into the MECT proper the way that the LOGAN and Alpha did. having overpowered avionics would also help explain why it was ultimately abandoned and the focus was put on somewhat simpler and more robust mecha)
one issue i noticed with the YF-4 is that RTT gave it a loadout of 6 LRM's, said to stored internally.. yet there is no way for it to hold missiles that large inside its bays. indeed the visible features barely seem large enough to hold that many MRM's. so in my own notes i've given it an experimental missile, basically an attempt to fit an LRM warhead and drive into the body of an MRM.. an experiment that resulted in missiles with a high failure rate. (also a version that fits the warhead of an LRM into the MRm body, with reduced range compared to an MRM created as a last minute stopgap to try and keep the mecha viable..)

[taalismn]

[
Well Fokker does hold the record for squeezing in the most people into an enclosed vehicle (several actually) on Macross Island (of course this was before getting serious with Grant).

T.R. Edwards never forgave Fokker for convincing him to be the guy they jammed into the under-seat compartment.

[ShadowLogan]

If we throw out the artwork, sure, the stated width might work. We can get three people per seat in my truck. Depending on their size of course. If we go about disregarding the art, the VF-1 can carry a platoon of infantry. I don't think we're going to toss the art for the VF-1 though. I'm not sure we should with the VT Car either. I think it'd be easier, and maybe better, to change the fluff. We're already given permission to do so a couple pages earlier.

The VT Car though artwork has issues with it, not only do you have the issue with the crew size/placement. You also have the fact that the artwork (one of them, the others don't have the same angle) identifies the unit as a "LRV-558" (FIVE-FIVE-EIGHT, the EIGHT looks like it could be a letter "B") but at no time is the unit called that in the text, only the "LRV-588" (FIVE-EIGHT-EIGHT) in the book AFAIK (I looked at the section itself, plus the table of contents and the section header index list, I have a first printing and maybe it changed in a later printing IDK). There are other issues related to the graphics, but this is getting off topic.

the YF-4 pretty much has to be written whole cloth, though i tend to assume its flight performance is at minimum comparable to a VF with the full FAST pack array, which not only explaisn why it was considered as a replacement, but also why it ended up being too complex and hard to maintain.

I'd assume the flight capacity would be similar to a VF-1R w/o the FAST Packs, with the -1R using tech for the YF-4. I assumed the complexity was (at minimum partly) related to its transformation system in-universe (sense they can't use the YF-4 from Macross) being to complex for its own good give its failure in FTS GN/Comic series. It's also possible the engines where maintenance nightmares even in testing, which could negatively impact** the program. In the FTS GN/comic Rick wasn't able to fire some weapon system (some type of gun given dialogue of switching back to missile) in F mode, which could also have had a negative impact* when take with the growing list of issues.

I also suspect that the YF-4 Veritech formed the basis for the Conbat nt-Fighter given their similar plan-forms (explaining away any actual differences as changes made for a more viable nt-fighter). Which might indicate that the Conbat could be considered a heavily neutered YF-4 OR the YF-4 didn't live up to the projected hype (and no one wants to admit it). Though personally I think HG should have just avoided the entire issue and made the YF-4 a non-transformable unit in RT, possibly a early prototype or competitor to the Conbat.

*this isn't unheard of in other RT veritechs to have mode limiting weapon systems so it really wouldn't be a deal breaker I suspect given the VHT-1 has this drawback, the Logan has this, the Beta has this, even the Alpha. The Condor's VT baseline may or may not belong here to. Though here I'm not sure why they couldn't fire the guns in F mode.

**though here I have to wonder if the engine issue, if it exists, could have been mitigated by changing engines to either something more proven (like the VF-1s) or something else in development (Alpha, Logan, Beta, Condor). It might mean taking a hit in engine performance though.

aone issue i noticed with the YF-4 is that RTT gave it a loadout of 6 LRM's, said to stored internally..

Well Palladium did get the Wing Station options wrong on the VFB-9 in 2E when compared to the Infopedia/AotSC entry. The 2E RPG (manga, not sure if it was fixed in deluxe) limits them to MRMs, but the Infopedia/AotSC allows for "3 x hardpoints on each wing capable of carrying long-range missiles or multiple ejection launchers." 2E's Mini Missiles on the Alpha are also classified as "4 x 78mm short-range missiles mounted in the head. Total ammunition supply is 8 missiles".

So the missiles might qualify as "LRM" by the Infoepdia standards, but in Palladium game mechanics are not equivalent to its "LRM". It probably also depends on where/how they sourced their YF-4 "declassified" info (as compared to the Infopedia article). Though I do like the idea of placing one-category up warhead on the next category down missile body (seen in Rifts Japan and Triax WBs IIRC).

[jaymz]

The LRV-558 issue stems from and was carried over from the original article the LRV-588 was based on in The Magic of Palladium Books.

[ShadowLogan]

Yeah I'm aware of the 558 being from that source, though I don't have that source so I don't know how the two compare (it's also supposed to have Merchant Republic Battloids IIRC). I don't wish to side track the thread anymore on this side topic, though it can provide a quick reason to discount the graphics in this case due to poor editing on PB's part even without a further deep dive into issues arising from making the graphics work with the stats or other design related issues.

[jaymz]

Agreed and yes it has a merchant republic battloid.

I picked up the collected version of the "magic" stuff palladium put out a while ago.

[Sambot]

given the veritech car isn't really related to robotech tactics, perhaps discussion of it could be taken to another thread?

as far as the RTT tactics stuff goes.. the zentreadi ones are somewhat easy to stat up. the Artillery Pod with the particle beam cannons appear to mount the same weapons as the dorsal gun on the Glaug Officer Pod, the male Power armor with the missiles seem to be mounting the light artillery pod's launchers instead of the normal should plasma cannon, and the female power armor variant seems to sarifice the shoulder missile launchers for a pair of PBC's like those off the battlepod. personally for me that last one is the most tricky given it is actually a downgrade over the missiles.. but i personally would give those guns the same automatic targeting rules that the VF-1R's head autocannon has, making the resulting suit a point defense suit within a unit of quadronos, for the shooting down of incoming missiles/kamikaze's even while the warrior inside engages with their forearm guns or leg missiles. (which in combination with the heavier missile payload of the standard suit, would have been very good at anti-invid operations. and the automatic guns would give their battle-sister's cover during a withdrawal to reload.)

the UEDF mecha require more custom writing, but i tend to assume the 'orguss armor' has main body armor bonus similar to the regular armored VF, while the arms, legs, and thruster pack are literally just super VF Fast pack parts. which i s why i tend to assume this armor was designed primarily for more offensive space operations. (which the standard armored VF can do, but it's rather ponderous and not very agile.)

the YF-4 pretty much has to be written whole cloth, though i tend to assume its flight performance is at minimum comparable to a VF with the full FAST pack array, which not only explaisn why it was considered as a replacement, but also why it ended up being too complex and hard to maintain. (to this end i would also give it the same 'fly by wire' bonuses in fighter mode as the VF-1, instead of adding a lesser version of those into the MECT proper the way that the LOGAN and Alpha did. having overpowered avionics would also help explain why it was ultimately abandoned and the focus was put on somewhat simpler and more robust mecha)
one issue i noticed with the YF-4 is that RTT gave it a loadout of 6 LRM's, said to stored internally.. yet there is no way for it to hold missiles that large inside its bays. indeed the visible features barely seem large enough to hold that many MRM's. so in my own notes i've given it an experimental missile, basically an attempt to fit an LRM warhead and drive into the body of an MRM.. an experiment that resulted in missiles with a high failure rate. (also a version that fits the warhead of an LRM into the MRm body, with reduced range compared to an MRM created as a last minute stopgap to try and keep the mecha viable..)

Yeah. The Zentraedi Mecha probably wouldn't be too hard. I could probably do the others except for two issues. I'm not good with sensor systems outside of saying basic sensors. I also tend to lean towards less MDC. Going by the show, they shouldn't have a lot. Plus if I ever get around to trying to make stats for later Macross Mecha, their MDC would end up being in the thousands.

Yeah I'm aware of the 558 being from that source, though I don't have that source so I don't know how the two compare (it's also supposed to have Merchant Republic Battloids IIRC). I don't wish to side track the thread anymore on this side topic, though it can provide a quick reason to discount the graphics in this case due to poor editing on PB's part even without a further deep dive into issues arising from making the graphics work with the stats or other design related issues.

There's a few differences between the Strike Force and Magic versions of the LRV.
Strike Force gives the VT Car a more complete write up. It also changed the name from LVT-558 to LVT-588. I think that could have just been an error in reading.
Strike Force has fewer locations and gives the wheels more MDC.
The art is changed in Strike Force so it looks cleaner and is in the same style as the rest of the boot.
Strike Force's version can travel faster longer but has more terrain restrictions.
Strike Force allows the LRV to use the GU-11. (I think the GU-11 would be way to big for LRV.)
Strike Force also uses a modified VF-1 hand to hand combat. Magic gives the LRV it's own combat training.

The differences aren't to major though. The Magic version could be handled as a prototype of the Strike Force one. I do like how Magic has it having a separate combat training though. I also think that if the LVT's write up swapped the Cyclone with the Tornado and dropped references to the Invid it would fit into Strike Force better. I still don't think it'd fit one inside or carry passengers but it'd fit the time period better.


I think one of the reasons why the LRV looks the way it does is because it's supposed to be able to fly in space which effected how Long drew it.
I'm not sure how the original creator, Hugh Moore, pictured it.

[jaymz]

I've written up a number of macross and have rewritten pretty much all the Robotech mecha...you're welcome use thar as a starting point to extrapolate as you please.

[Rabid Southern Cross Fan]

Well Palladium did get the Wing Station options wrong on the VFB-9 in 2E when compared to the Infopedia/AotSC entry. The 2E RPG (manga, not sure if it was fixed in deluxe) limits them to MRMs, but the Infopedia/AotSC allows for "3 x hardpoints on each wing capable of carrying long-range missiles or multiple ejection launchers." 2E's Mini Missiles on the Alpha are also classified as "4 x 78mm short-range missiles mounted in the head. Total ammunition supply is 8 missiles".

Palladium got a LOT of things wrong in the 2E RPG, like forgetting the Ajax has a second weapons hardpoint to hold a beam cannon (either the heavier 2 or lighter 1-barrel) as well as the TLM-1 Missile Pods munitions obviously NOT being "mini-missiles". Then there was the stupidity of the VHT-1 Spartas main gun being limited to twice per melee round when there are multiple episodes showing the main gun firing upwards of 12 shots in 15 seconds. Among other things....

[ShadowLogan]

Yeah. The Zentraedi Mecha probably wouldn't be too hard. I could probably do the others except for two issues. I'm not good with sensor systems outside of saying basic sensors. I also tend to lean towards less MDC. Going by the show, they shouldn't have a lot. Plus if I ever get around to trying to make stats for later Macross Mecha, their MDC would end up being in the thousands.

MDC assignments in the RPG are largely arbitrary though they do follow a rough pattern (in terms of total MDC vs mass in kg), and weapon performance is completely arbitrary.

Palladium's sensors IMHO tend to be underwhelming in certain platforms in terms of range and such. And while 2E RT tried to do something with more advanced avionics (jamming, data links, etc) they left much to be desired.

Well Palladium did get the Wing Station options wrong on the VFB-9 in 2E when compared to the Infopedia/AotSC entry. The 2E RPG (manga, not sure if it was fixed in deluxe) limits them to MRMs, but the Infopedia/AotSC allows for "3 x hardpoints on each wing capable of carrying long-range missiles or multiple ejection launchers." 2E's Mini Missiles on the Alpha are also classified as "4 x 78mm short-range missiles mounted in the head. Total ammunition supply is 8 missiles".

Palladium got a LOT of things wrong in the 2E RPG, like forgetting the Ajax has a second weapons hardpoint to hold a beam cannon (either the heavier 2 or lighter 1-barrel) as well as the TLM-1 Missile Pods munitions obviously NOT being "mini-missiles". Then there was the stupidity of the VHT-1 Spartas main gun being limited to twice per melee round when there are multiple episodes showing the main gun firing upwards of 12 shots in 15 seconds. Among other things....

You will get no argument from me that the list of things Palladium got wrong in the 2E is more extensive, you can add the Logan to list in a few ways (wing/shields as they appeared in 1E and the show are gone, the nose gun when it fires a burst fires 6 rounds per barrel in the show not the 6 rounds total). Then there is the saga bias they introduced (intentionally or not IDK).

[Sambot]

I've written up a number of macross and have rewritten pretty much all the Robotech mecha...you're welcome use thar as a starting point to extrapolate as you please.

Thanks. Your site is pretty cool.