Forums of the Megaverse®

Palladium dosn't use logic. they just assign whatever stat they think is "cool"

logic dosn't matter.

Yep, pretty much.

Don't try to figure it out. You will just end up with a headache. Just have fun with what works for you.

Carella had it right. Look at phase world.

Welcome to our world, I'm afraid it ain't pretty.

PB doesn't seem to use any real method to determine the MDC of robots and the damage of weapons beyond "Um, about this much."

Then KS comes along and makes sure nothing is significantly more powerful then what has been previously published, so you end up with some very odd things indeed. (Like a guy with a rifle being able to outgun a tank.)

You either change it or learn to live with it. *Shrugs*

Kikkoman wrote:

Kalinda wrote:Then KS comes along and makes sure nothing is significantly more powerful then what has been previously published, so you end up with some very odd things indeed. (Like a guy with a rifle being able to outgun a tank.)

wait... how does that make sense? If KS does make sure things aren't significantly more powerful... why would the coalition have two 18ft robots, one with MDC in the 300's, and the newer one nearly 700?

I think Kalinda was referring mostly to the boom gun benchmark. Go ahead and count how many weapons do 3d6x10 or more outside of phase world.

Gotta Agree CJ Carella had it all right, but don't bother thinking about the stuff they did in the previous books with all the screwed up stuff but thats KS and the others.

Shadowmagic wrote:Right now you are mostly nit-picking over logic and common sense about things that are fully statted out in black in white. That's so minor and easy to change as you or your GM sees fit. Wait until you start to discover more holes in the rules, then the real fun begins!!!

Remember, imagination can conquer all. I hope you come to enjoy Palladium Books as much as I do. They are not as structured as most game systems. That makes it easy to "wing it" and go for story over mechanics. Something many less flexible systems can't do.

I don't think it's a seasy as your making out, I think one of the worst things about Rifts is that the damages between infantry and vehicle weapons are so out of proportion. As a GM I can and do fix it, but it's not that easy, here is a rough guide;

First, double all damages of Power Armour weapons (except missiles).

Triple all damages (and often MDC) of Robots.

However then you have acceptions like the GlitterBOy, is it a robot or PA, and if we double the damage or all the rest do we double the damage of the Boom Gun.

Just pointing out that it's not that easy to fix, the reason we buy RPGs is that we assume it's all been tested and does not need these kinds of adjustments.

Lagos wrote:Gotta Agree CJ Carella had it all right, but don't bother thinking about the stuff they did in the previous books with all the screwed up stuff but thats KS and the others.

Yeah but as soon as he tried to publish some realistic military stuff some others start yelling "Munchkin! Munchkin!"

Mindcrime wrote:Carella had it right. Look at phase world.

For (at least) once, we agree.

Say what you wnat about Carella and "Power Creep," but at least his creations were always to scale.

I shudder to think what MDC Values Kev would have given to Cosmo-Knights and Giant Spaceships (and I heard that in many of the Carella Books, he pared down the Stats as it was)......but I bet that it'd probably be less than a Devastator...

I thought Carella was a munchkin until I read his work in Witchcraft, gained respect for him as a writer, and looked at what he wrote for Palladium objectively. I still don't like a lot of the stuff he wrote in SA, but not because it was munchkin in any way.

no the munchkin would be Bill Coffin, Read the hand of tezuan

yes.. a big complaint from CJ books was that " WAAAAA my Juicer in 40 MDC armor can't take a hit from a 2" Nozzle plasma Shell1"

Kikkoman wrote:I still haven't actually played a game of Rifts... so maybe I'm missing something, but while reading Coalition War campaign...

all the robots/PA/guns don't make any sense.
why a 100lb railgun does less damage than an infantry laser

How come a 12ft tall PA has nearly double the MDC of a 28ft tall Urban assault robot. That flying super SAMAS also has more MDC than the 28ft tall robot.

How come a SuperSAMAS weighs sooo much, yet flies.
and the SuperSamas has more MDC than all those ground pounding Power armors. Shouldn't the 'no neck mauler' with its 'heavy armor design' have more MDC than something that's suppost to fly?

If the Abolisher is suppost to be the slow/heavy armor one, why does the SkullSmasher have nearly twice as many MDC and is able to do flying jump kicks?

I would just think that logically...
a flying PA would generally be lighter MDC than a ground bound PA
a 60t robot would have more MDC than a 35t robot. etc.

It's also suprising to see a 28ft tall 80t robot get +2 to dodge.

I also have the Triax book. It just seems wierd...
the Coalition SuperSAMAS, 10ft tall and able to fly at 500mph
having more MDC than the 18ft tall Dynamax robot.

I just think like... I dunno. If I was going to be drawing up robots and power armor, I'd keep a vague idea of scale.

somethin' like...
200-350 MDC for light/flying PA (ex: SAMAS)
250-400 for heavy PA (ex:Sampson)
300-500 Light RV's (ex: Ultimax)
350+ heavy to supergigantic RV's (ex: skull smasher)

with exeptions for glitter boys and aliens

there pulling the stats for allthere stuff our of their collective asses

CJ's big problem was his first book was pantheons of the megaverse, which was supposed to be powerful. He then used that as his benchmark and made everything arround that powerlevel. I honestly think that that was the problem

Mindcrime wrote:

Kikkoman wrote:

Kalinda wrote:Then KS comes along and makes sure nothing is significantly more powerful then what has been previously published, so you end up with some very odd things indeed. (Like a guy with a rifle being able to outgun a tank.)

wait... how does that make sense? If KS does make sure things aren't significantly more powerful... why would the coalition have two 18ft robots, one with MDC in the 300's, and the newer one nearly 700?

I think Kalinda was referring mostly to the boom gun benchmark. Go ahead and count how many weapons do 3d6x10 or more outside of phase world.

Correct, I was mainly thinking of weapon damages with that comment.

I'm bored... feel like commenting on the original post...

Kikkoman wrote:I still haven't actually played a game of Rifts... so maybe I'm missing something, but while reading Coalition War campaign...

all the robots/PA/guns don't make any sense.
why a 100lb railgun does less damage than an infantry laser

A single e-clip packs enough power (estimated) to run a 100 watt light bulb for 270 hours... or it can discharge all of that power in a matter of seconds.
Nuclear powered systems may have more power in the long term, but simply cannot match that kind of power in the short term without a capacitor system that acts much like an e-clip, charging up over time for those short periods when the energy is actually needed in combat.
And since rail guns are usually connected to a nuclear power source and not much better than a machine gun...

Also...
Lower weapon power convinces pilots of expensive equipment not to go Rambo and blow up millions of credits of military hardware.
Higher weapon power for infantry weapons convinces the propaganda fed frontline soliders made up of "unwanted" volunteers and draftees to go Rambo and help keep the multi-million credit equipment and more desirable/loyal/experienced troops from getting blown up.

How come a 12ft tall PA has nearly double the MDC of a 28ft tall Urban assault robot. That flying super SAMAS also has more MDC than the 28ft tall robot.

If by 12ft tall you mean something like the GB (well, maybe, it's only 10ft 5in), or some other "advanced" PA, it is because it is an advanced pre-rifts or post rifts design and the most advanced thing around at the time. It also uses materials that are extremely tough and are likely molecularly bonded for extra durability. "rounded" armor is also more durable than "flat" armor.

For the 28ft tall Urban Assault Robot, I'm lost, as the only 28ft tall robot I see in the CWC has more MDC than even a GB. The only "Urban Assault Robot" I can think of is the Enforcer, but it's only around 19ft tall and has been around since a little after 12 PA, making it a very old and not so advanced design.

The Super SAMAS is a new design, likely using some tech the CS got from Triax/NGR, and it definitely looks a bit bulky, meaning it can have a nice deal of armor. 800 pounds of the GB weight is the gun/ammo, but the Super SAMAS doesn't have any "big guns" or tons of physical ammo for such a "big gun", meaning more of its weight is likely armor.

How come a SuperSAMAS weighs sooo much, yet flies.
and the SuperSamas has more MDC than all those ground pounding Power armors. Shouldn't the 'no neck mauler' with its 'heavy armor design' have more MDC than something that's suppost to fly?

Look at the Super SAMAS weight. Half of its weight is Super SAMAS itself, the other half is Flight Systems for it. That flight system has enough power it could get a GB to fly...
If you look at many aircraft, the engine size/weight is not that big compared to the aircraft. With enough engine power and the right control systems, you could probably make even make a brick fly. Heck, look at a bumble bee, for many years scientists couldn't figure out how they could even fly.
For the mauler PA, it is 25% lighter than the Super SAMAS minus flight system, so it wouldn't be packing as much potential armor.
Also, the Super SAMAS is likely restricted to "elite" RPA personel.

If the Abolisher is suppost to be the slow/heavy armor one, why does the SkullSmasher have nearly twice as many MDC and is able to do flying jump kicks?

Why is a GB and other non-flying PA said the be "slow" when they can run 60mph?
Why does a foot soldier packing a heavy particle rifle have more firepower than a main gun on a 50ft robot?
Who knows...

Oh, there is also the thing of it being a newer design made with the knowledge the CS was going to be doing some "actual" wars for a change.
They needed something that was going to do more than achieve victories that involved wiping out d-bee settlements that couldn't defend themselves against a pair of fully equipped CS soldiers or a SAMAS.

I would just think that logically...
a flying PA would generally be lighter MDC than a ground bound PA
a 60t robot would have more MDC than a 35t robot. etc.

Weight is not the only factor. The overall design, purpose for it, and materials used are other factors.

It's also suprising to see a 28ft tall 80t robot get +2 to dodge.

The "slow and ponderous" GB gets the same from elite robot combat Training.

I also have the Triax book. It just seems wierd...
the Coalition SuperSAMAS, 10ft tall and able to fly at 500mph
having more MDC than the 18ft tall Dynamax robot.

The Dyna-Max is said to be "quick and agile", so it likely means it relies more on speed and agility than simple durabilty.
The Dyna-Max combat training seems to back this up.

I just think like... I dunno. If I was going to be drawing up robots and power armor, I'd keep a vague idea of scale.

somethin' like...
200-350 MDC for light/flying PA (ex: SAMAS)
250-400 for heavy PA (ex:Sampson)
300-500 Light RV's (ex: Ultimax)
350+ heavy to supergigantic RV's (ex: skull smasher)

with exeptions for glitter boys and aliens

Doesn't work that good.
Different artists draw things different things in different ways, and they might only be working from a physical description more than having any real "details" other than how many/types guns it has, # of arms/legs, size, etc.

There is the chance that not many people who come up with the stats of things also do the art for the things they make.

Try to think of the difference in MDC value along these lines, 6" of armor from a World War 1 tank would have less resistance to damage than the same amount of armor used in the M1 Abrams tank of today because of the technology used in producing it.

I know its not a perfect solution but at least it keeps my Excedrin Migraine intake low.

I guess the Palladium values are ridiculous.

It begins even in SDC - face it, a bank vault having
more SDC than an MBT... Well, plausible, for a really
big vault. (Remember modern MBT armor provides
protection in the 1000+ mm Homogenous Rolled Armor
range), but having a passange jet more SDC than
an MBT... AR made it a bit better, but not much.

Now, for CJ Carella - even his scalings are (in the
printed form, that is) bugged, just check in
DMB2:Phase World for the three items below:

Phalanx tank
Proctor heavy fighter
Runner ship

Check MDC values, and vehicle weight.
----------------------------------
For the Mauler vs. SAMs debate, on can assume, that Iron Heart
has lower tech (ie. weaker, heavier materials) than Chi-Town, but
still... I guess the "Iron Hammer" MBT from Mercenaries has near
the realistic statistics for a contemporary (Ie. late XX., early XXI.th
century) tank.
On the other hand, I think that a heavy (machine)gun in the .50
range does d4 MD per bullet, even with standard (steel core AP)
rounds - much more with ramjet ammo.

But that is just my two cents.

Adios
KLM

Civilian vehicles are one thing, armored military vehicles
are another - most armies do not purchase MBTs which
weight 45+ tons but do not stand a chance against a
frontal hit from a 105 mm cannon...

(But some people remember the fate of the HMS Sheffield
at the Falklands... )

...this is especially true in the case of armed forces, who
actually engage in warfare daily.

In game terms, a 30 ton tank produced by various
manufacturers (old CS, old Triax, new NG, Iron Heart
just to name a few, on roughly equal technological
capabilities) might have stats between 350 to 700
MDCs ("nerfed" canon stats), according to the designers
rolls in engineering skills , but NOT LESS (and
rarely more).

Adios
KLM

i think the best example is the SDF-1 and the Macross fortess same ship but MDC is different on so many different things

Shadowmagic wrote:I hope you come to enjoy Palladium Books as much as I do. They are not as structured as most game systems.

This is the reason my mates and I refer to it as the Palladium Jumble, rather than the Palladium System.

Yeah, the "fluff text" is great (usually), even the items
themselves, but the statistics are horrible.

Adios
KLM

The scale of weapons to armour has never been a strong suite of Palladiums'. Large weapons in comparisson to portable weaponry, armour (both robot and vehicle), missiles, explosives, none of them are scaled against each other very well.

grandmaster z0b wrote:
I don't think it's a seasy as your making out, I think one of the worst things about Rifts is that the damages between infantry and vehicle weapons are so out of proportion. As a GM I can and do fix it, but it's not that easy, here is a rough guide;

First, double all damages of Power Armour weapons (except missiles).

Triple all damages (and often MDC) of Robots.

However then you have acceptions like the GlitterBOy, is it a robot or PA, and if we double the damage or all the rest do we double the damage of the Boom Gun.

Just pointing out that it's not that easy to fix, the reason we buy RPGs is that we assume it's all been tested and does not need these kinds of adjustments.

Thats exactly what I proposed. As a matter of a fact, I say a GB is a robot (because I finally just accepted the Reinforced Pilots Compartment house rule to draw a line), so yes, tripple boom gun damage (9D6X10 should scare the crap out of people).

I would even go so far to double Robot MDC and tripple Tank MDC (keep body armor, exosuits, and power armor normal, and small arms unchanged)

1. A 100lb rail gun doing more than a laser pistol? Ridiculous? No. Here is a real world example. I fill a sock with 10lbs of rocks. Will it do more damage to someone than a 4lb handgun?

What is going on in Palladium mechanics is more akin to a .22 Pistol doing more damage than a .50 calibre rifle.
Yes, the bag of rocks example holds some validity, but the scale of weapon damage in Rifts is so far off that weapons of similar or identical classes are off. Your example does not compare firearm to firearm, it compares a firearm to a hand-thrown rock.

I just chalk it up to tech improvements (new stuff does more damage and has more protection) and that the longer range, higher capacity lasers (4000 ft range, overbuilt to fire several hundred shots before overheating or something) compared to a rifle that does the same damage but may only expect to fire 30-40 shots at a time balances it all out.

Vehicle laser: 6d6 md at 4000 ft, expected to fire hundreds of times without a break, couple hundred pounds (cooling system, older and cheaper redundant parts, etc), and cheap.

Infantry laser: 6d6 md burst at 2000 ft, expected to fire maybe 30-40 pulses max before taking a break, 7 pounds, and expensive.

Old robot: 350 mdc, slow
New robot: 900 mdc, fast

I do agree with the super samas being over armored compared to the mauler and others.

argos wrote:Maybe its me, but so many people are quick to criticize Palladium and KS. Not to sound like an @$$ or anythin but I dont see any of these people writing their own books. Of course that doesnt mean we shouldnt crtiicize, but take that into account.

Secondly, alot of the stuff people complain about can be explained IF instead of whining put some thought into it and try to explain. For example

1. A 100lb rail gun doing more than a laser pistol? Ridiculous? No. Here is a real world example. I fill a sock with 10lbs of rocks. Will it do more damage to someone than a 4lb handgun? How bout a stick of dynatmite that cant way more than 2lbs. Size is not indicative of power.

I can agree with this to some extent. Going by the mechanics, firepower has been maxed out to some extent. Every MD weapon is effectively an anti-tank weapon, and the technology has not been discovered to make weapons any more powerful than they are already.

Of course, the vehicle damage is still very screwed up. Even with that explanation, there's NO reason why vehicle mounted weapons should be weaker than normal weapons. Every decent robot/vehicle should have the equivilant of a Wilk's 457 mounted on it, and the vehicle railguns should do at least as much damage as hand-held ones (or at least have a much larger area of affect).

2. Large armor having less MDC than small armor? Proposterous! No. Size of armor is nto indicative of strength. MDC stands for Mega Damage Capacity. The key word is Capacity. High MDC doesnt mean more armor, it means that armor can withstand greater damage. High MDC is not indicitive of lots of armor, just high quality armor. ANother real world example. I make a suit of armor 20 ft tall made of cotton. I also make a 6ft suit of steel armor. WHich would you use?

I'd make 20' tall armor made of steel.
Why don't the people in Rifts? Why do they insist on making their 20' tall armor out of cotton?

3. Regarding the Super Samas, we have to remember it is the top of line latest model of armor from THE high tech power in NA. That means top quality armor, high MDCapacity, and light weight. The latest in PA flight tech is utilized. That is why it is so much stronger than other suits. The NGR suits are old suits in comparison. The new NGR books will no doubt include new armor and probably increase the MDC values of the old armor to reflect current tech. Why do contra grav suits from Phase world fly faster than CS armor? Same reason why the Super Sam can fly despite its weight compared to other armors. Better tech.

Or maybe the writers just thought it would be kewl.

Technology is the reason why the CS is so much better than other nations. The criticism shouldnt be, why is the CS stuff so powerful compared to other tech, but why is the other tech as powerful as it is. CS tech will always be more high powered than stuff on the mass market (except for the alien like Sploog stuff and magical like TW items, but these arent mass marketed to the public like NG weapons etc. . . ) and that how it should be.

You would think, but it simply ain't so.
Compare the C-12 to the JA-12. Or, for that matter, to the high-end Wilk's guns.
Heck, compare it to the generic L-20 pulse rifle.
Even the newer CP-40 is weaker and/or less efficient than what other places have to offer.

argos wrote:But laser tech and rail gun arent that similar. One is a projectile the other is a laser. Sure they are both firearms, but that is a very general category. In my sock o rock example, could say they are both weapons and are therefore in the same category. My only point was that the poster included the weight of the rail gun, as if the weight had something to do with its damage capacity. I was saying that the weight is irrelevant in damage capacity. i think what your saying is, why do rail guns (regardless of their weight) do less damage then lasers or ions or etc. . . To me, that is the real question.

I am not making the comparisson based on weight, but on size.
Weapons simply aren't scaled well to each other based on sheer size.
Nor are they consistent: Supposedly Particle Beam technology can't be applied to pistols using Earth Technology, yet Germany, Japan, and Northern Gun all have one.
While weight may come into the discussion due to overall size of any particular weapon, it is not the weight that makes to sole determination.

Sentinel wrote:Supposedly Particle Beam technology can't be applied to pistols using Earth Technology

Where does it say that?

Kikkoman wrote:descriptions also don't add up with the rules often

Take the Terror Trooper, it says "pilot sits in chest controlling with pedals and levers. but under running it says "pilot fatigues at 10% rate"
then the GB Killer says "like the terror trooper, pilot sits in chest, etc." and under running says "pilot does not fatigue"

was it the description of the terror trooper that didn't add up to its stats or the stats that didn't add up to the description?

Pushing those pedals and levers is HARD work!

One must also remember that some of these weapons attached to vehicles ARE just variants of the hand held ones, mostly this applies to rail guns but still, is there a difference between a C-40R carried by a borg or a SAMAS as opposed to the one mounted in the top hatch of the Abolisher, no its the same gun.

Its like asking why the .30 cal hull gun on a Sherman tank does the same damage as the one carried by U.S. Paratroops. Its the same gun it just has more ammo available to it when mounted on the tank.

Now in the case of a completely unique weapon system mounted to a 20' tall bot vehicle most likely its not unique system but a modification of an existing one.

But, even I find this explanation lacking to cover all instances.

The main deal with M.D.C. armor that people seem to forget is that it is nearly icomprehensible in our frame of reference. Sure, there is a few modern examples, but they are not truly etrenched within in our understanding yet.

The Armor Plating on an M1A1 Abrahms is much better than that of which was found on the Roman Siege Towers...but the siege towers were bigger.

Bigger does not necessarily mean more powerful/heavily armored. The Super SAMAS uses much more advanced armor than the Enforcer, and I see no problem with that. ((Though I will agree that certain large robots need more MDC)).

Etc, etc, etc.

~ Josh

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Sentinel wrote:Supposedly Particle Beam technology can't be applied to pistols using Earth Technology

Where does it say that?

Rifts: Japan, pg 122, AT-130 Particle Beam Pistol: "The P-Beam pistol is is a Pre-Rifts' design and the only P-Beam Pistol of human design on Earth."
In the notes, it states that H-Brand cannot duplicate P-Beam technology, and that the psitol is exclusively available through the military (Republic of Japan).
Yet, in spite of this claim, the NGR has such a pistol (availible in World Book 5, which was released prior to Japan), and much later the NG45LP was available (Juicer Uprisings).

Killer Cyborg wrote:

argos wrote:Maybe its me, but so many people are quick to criticize Palladium and KS. Not to sound like an @$$ or anythin but I dont see any of these people writing their own books. Of course that doesnt mean we shouldnt crtiicize, but take that into account.

Secondly, alot of the stuff people complain about can be explained IF instead of whining put some thought into it and try to explain. For example

1. A 100lb rail gun doing more than a laser pistol? Ridiculous? No. Here is a real world example. I fill a sock with 10lbs of rocks. Will it do more damage to someone than a 4lb handgun? How bout a stick of dynatmite that cant way more than 2lbs. Size is not indicative of power.

I can agree with this to some extent. Going by the mechanics, firepower has been maxed out to some extent. Every MD weapon is effectively an anti-tank weapon, and the technology has not been discovered to make weapons any more powerful than they are already.

Of course, the vehicle damage is still very screwed up. Even with that explanation, there's NO reason why vehicle mounted weapons should be weaker than normal weapons. Every decent robot/vehicle should have the equivilant of a Wilk's 457 mounted on it, and the vehicle railguns should do at least as much damage as hand-held ones (or at least have a much larger area of affect).

2. Large armor having less MDC than small armor? Proposterous! No. Size of armor is nto indicative of strength. MDC stands for Mega Damage Capacity. The key word is Capacity. High MDC doesnt mean more armor, it means that armor can withstand greater damage. High MDC is not indicitive of lots of armor, just high quality armor. ANother real world example. I make a suit of armor 20 ft tall made of cotton. I also make a 6ft suit of steel armor. WHich would you use?

I'd make 20' tall armor made of steel.
Why don't the people in Rifts? Why do they insist on making their 20' tall armor out of cotton?

3. Regarding the Super Samas, we have to remember it is the top of line latest model of armor from THE high tech power in NA. That means top quality armor, high MDCapacity, and light weight. The latest in PA flight tech is utilized. That is why it is so much stronger than other suits. The NGR suits are old suits in comparison. The new NGR books will no doubt include new armor and probably increase the MDC values of the old armor to reflect current tech. Why do contra grav suits from Phase world fly faster than CS armor? Same reason why the Super Sam can fly despite its weight compared to other armors. Better tech.

Or maybe the writers just thought it would be kewl.

Technology is the reason why the CS is so much better than other nations. The criticism shouldnt be, why is the CS stuff so powerful compared to other tech, but why is the other tech as powerful as it is. CS tech will always be more high powered than stuff on the mass market (except for the alien like Sploog stuff and magical like TW items, but these arent mass marketed to the public like NG weapons etc. . . ) and that how it should be.

You would think, but it simply ain't so.
Compare the C-12 to the JA-12. Or, for that matter, to the high-end Wilk's guns.
Heck, compare it to the generic L-20 pulse rifle.
Even the newer CP-40 is weaker and/or less efficient than what other places have to offer.

Agreed with Killer, AND his refutation of the previous Poster's Points, on all counts.

Mergatroid wrote:

Josh Sinsapaugh wrote:The main deal with M.D.C. armor that people seem to forget is that it is nearly icomprehensible in our frame of reference. Sure, there is a few modern examples, but they are not truly etrenched within in our understanding yet.

The Armor Plating on an M1A1 Abrahms is much better than that of which was found on the Roman Siege Towers...but the siege towers were bigger.

Bigger does not necessarily mean more powerful/heavily armored. The Super SAMAS uses much more advanced armor than the Enforcer, and I see no problem with that. ((Though I will agree that certain large robots need more MDC)).

Etc, etc, etc.

~ Josh

Something that those of you who are making this argument are missing, I think, is that an M1A1 is a few centuries ahead of a Roman seige tower. The equipment in rifts, however, is supposed to be all of the same technology level (or at least much closer). I think comparing an M1A1 to the Russian T-62 would be closer to what Rifts should be. While these 2 tanks have different "power levels", they don't have anywhere near the disparity of power that is seen in Rifts, in my opinion, for equipment from the same era.

It seems that you are not taking into account different maerials.

A Robot that is the same in every other aspect except what metal it is armored with, will have different M.D.C.

Think about: M.D. Ceramics, Cera-Steel, Mega-Steel, Chromium-Titanium Composite (Glitterboy Armor), all of these have a different amount of M.D.C. even when applied to a robot of the same size.

A robot that is 28 feet tall that is using an inferior material will have less M.D.C. than the 8 foot PA with a superior material. Similar to how an S.D.C. equivalent will have varying amounts of S.D.C. because one is steel and the other titanium.

Look at modern cars. A 2006 Hummer and a 2006 Sportscar slam into one another at the same speed. Both are from the same era...which will come out much worse for the wear?

Of course, you could argue that the hummer is much bigger. So instead, a civilian hummer and a military one, both equivlent size, collide. Both are using materials that are developed in the same era, but I guarentee that the Military Hummer will be in much better shape.

Fast forward 300 years, Northern Gun puts out a Robot Vehicle that is designed for use by Adventurers. The NG robot has 375 M.D.C. At the same time NG puts out a PA that is designed for Heavy Infantry field combat, this PA has 300 M.D.C., only 75 less than its much larger counterpart. Similar in many aspects to how an SUV will have much more S.D.C. than a PT Cruiser.

~ Josh

Kikkoman wrote:Now... since Triax 109 is suppost to be coming out soon

Do you think Triax should be 'upgraded' to match the wackiness of CS War Campaign, or should it try to 'normalize' things?

Hopefully Triax wont be as out of whack as some but...

Kikkoman wrote:Bah, Rifts needs a super-ultimate edition where everything is made to make sense. Have a 'big book of robot stats made with logic' with no pictures or flavor text so you still would want the original worldbooks for background.

They have it.
The GMG has most of the goodies before 2002. All you would need to do is go through and pencil in better stats. Make some stats that work for your campaign.

argos wrote:Despite all the tech bein from the same region (North America) the cs has greater tech and is not sharing. Therefore their stuff is going to be better. They also have the scientists, money, and resources to make improvements that NG cant match up. Wilks lasers are great, but Wilks is limited to laser tech so they should be left out. Laser tech and armor tech are two different areas.

That's bunk.

EVERYTHING that the CS has, the NGR has, too...including

A]] 300 years of ongoing development.

B]] The Germans were at least as innovative as the American Empire, and perhaps even more so (they gave us Force Fields and Psynetics via Mindwerks). And Triax has pretty much the same Golden Age "Jumping Off" point that North America/CS uses to its adavntage, if not even more of a 'headstart.'

and last but not least

C]] The increased motivation for innovation that historically occurs in Wartime.

And if a century of CONSTANT fighting against a truly intractable, evenly-matched foe (unlike the Paper Tigers that the CS fights most of the time) doesn't cause innovation, then nothing will.

Short Answer: I don't think that it's anything sinister or lazy on KS's part (although I don't understand why he won't just post official Updates to NGR Weaponry to a Rifter, if he hasn't already done so).

But I don't think that the "Hand of God" is the reason why Germany's Weps don't get better, either.

I believe that KS simply has "moved on" and that most of Rifts Earth will stay put, story-wise, with the exception of North America (where I'll wager most of Palladium's Rifts sales are).

Damned shame, too.

I can't speak for the rest of you, but I'd snap up a new Triax World Book faster than stank on shhhhhh.......................................t

cornholioprime wrote:

argos wrote:Despite all the tech bein from the same region (North America) the cs has greater tech and is not sharing. Therefore their stuff is going to be better. They also have the scientists, money, and resources to make improvements that NG cant match up. Wilks lasers are great, but Wilks is limited to laser tech so they should be left out. Laser tech and armor tech are two different areas.

That's bunk.

EVERYTHING that the CS has, the NGR has, too...including

A]] 300 years of ongoing development.

B]] The Germans were at least as innovative as the American Empire, and perhaps even more so (they gave us Force Fields and Psynetics via Mindwerks). And Triax has pretty much the same Golden Age "Jumping Off" point that North America/CS uses to its adavntage, if not even more of a 'headstart.'

and last but not least

C]] The increased motivation for innovation that historically occurs in Wartime.

And if a century of CONSTANT fighting against a truly intractable, evenly-matched foe (unlike the Paper Tigers that the CS fights most of the time) doesn't cause innovation, then nothing will.

Short Answer: I don't think that it's anything sinister or lazy on KS's part (although I don't understand why he won't just post official Updates to NGR Weaponry to a Rifter, if he hasn't already done so).

But I don't think that the "Hand of God" is the reason why Germany's Weps don't get better, either.

I believe that KS simply has "moved on" and that most of Rifts Earth will stay put, story-wise, with the exception of North America (where I'll wager most of Palladium's Rifts sales are).

Damned shame, too.

I can't speak for the rest of you, but I'd snap up a new Triax World Book faster than stank on shhhhhh.......................................t

Agreed on all points.

Nxla666 wrote:

cornholioprime wrote:

argos wrote:Despite all the tech bein from the same region (North America) the cs has greater tech and is not sharing. Therefore their stuff is going to be better. They also have the scientists, money, and resources to make improvements that NG cant match up. Wilks lasers are great, but Wilks is limited to laser tech so they should be left out. Laser tech and armor tech are two different areas.

That's bunk.

EVERYTHING that the CS has, the NGR has, too...including

A]] 300 years of ongoing development.

B]] The Germans were at least as innovative as the American Empire, and perhaps even more so (they gave us Force Fields and Psynetics via Mindwerks). And Triax has pretty much the same Golden Age "Jumping Off" point that North America/CS uses to its adavntage, if not even more of a 'headstart.'

and last but not least

C]] The increased motivation for innovation that historically occurs in Wartime.

And if a century of CONSTANT fighting against a truly intractable, evenly-matched foe (unlike the Paper Tigers that the CS fights most of the time) doesn't cause innovation, then nothing will.

Short Answer: I don't think that it's anything sinister or lazy on KS's part (although I don't understand why he won't just post official Updates to NGR Weaponry to a Rifter, if he hasn't already done so).

But I don't think that the "Hand of God" is the reason why Germany's Weps don't get better, either.

I believe that KS simply has "moved on" and that most of Rifts Earth will stay put, story-wise, with the exception of North America (where I'll wager most of Palladium's Rifts sales are).

Damned shame, too.

I can't speak for the rest of you, but I'd snap up a new Triax World Book faster than stank on shhhhhh.......................................t

Agreed on all points.

Seconded

Mandalorian wrote:

Nxla666 wrote:

cornholioprime wrote:

argos wrote:Despite all the tech bein from the same region (North America) the cs has greater tech and is not sharing. Therefore their stuff is going to be better. They also have the scientists, money, and resources to make improvements that NG cant match up. Wilks lasers are great, but Wilks is limited to laser tech so they should be left out. Laser tech and armor tech are two different areas.

That's bunk.

EVERYTHING that the CS has, the NGR has, too...including

A]] 300 years of ongoing development.

B]] The Germans were at least as innovative as the American Empire, and perhaps even more so (they gave us Force Fields and Psynetics via Mindwerks). And Triax has pretty much the same Golden Age "Jumping Off" point that North America/CS uses to its adavntage, if not even more of a 'headstart.'

and last but not least

C]] The increased motivation for innovation that historically occurs in Wartime.

And if a century of CONSTANT fighting against a truly intractable, evenly-matched foe (unlike the Paper Tigers that the CS fights most of the time) doesn't cause innovation, then nothing will.

Short Answer: I don't think that it's anything sinister or lazy on KS's part (although I don't understand why he won't just post official Updates to NGR Weaponry to a Rifter, if he hasn't already done so).

But I don't think that the "Hand of God" is the reason why Germany's Weps don't get better, either.

I believe that KS simply has "moved on" and that most of Rifts Earth will stay put, story-wise, with the exception of North America (where I'll wager most of Palladium's Rifts sales are).

Damned shame, too.

I can't speak for the rest of you, but I'd snap up a new Triax World Book faster than stank on shhhhhh.......................................t

Agreed on all points.

Seconded

Thirded, motion carries...

cornholioprime wrote:Short Answer: I don't think that it's anything sinister or lazy on KS's part (although I don't understand why he won't just post official Updates to NGR Weaponry to a Rifter, if he hasn't already done so).

Yeah there were some updates to NGR vehicles in a Rifter article, but it was more of an adventure that had some vehicles updated. It included an updated TX-5000 Devastator, however it was still woefully underpowered. The only real weaponry upgrade was the BoomGun which still did more damage than any other gun on it but was like 1/10th of the size of the laser rifle thing carries. I have a feeling it may have been nerfed in the editing.

Korentin_Black wrote:Small note - the notion of innovation occuring during wartime is a popular myth.

During the second world war, almost not a single device was /invented/ but a hell of a lot of things were dusted off and rapidly applied.

Radar, jet engines, atomics - all existed on the drawing-board stage pre-war. During the actual conflict, everyone was too busy making stuff to do any pure research.

War doesn't promote innovation, so much as implementation.

It kind of nets out the same, but it's a good point nonetheless.

Korentin_Black wrote:Small note - the notion of innovation occuring during wartime is a popular myth.

During the second world war, almost not a single device was /invented/ but a hell of a lot of things were dusted off and rapidly applied.

Radar, jet engines, atomics - all existed on the drawing-board stage pre-war. During the actual conflict, everyone was too busy making stuff to do any pure research.

War doesn't promote innovation, so much as implementation.

While I agree with some degree, the conflict of the NGR-Monster
Empires is more like the Cold War... Where there are decades
of peace, but under the shadow of the incoming war.
Of course not total peace - but the Cold War wasn't that cold either.

Adios
KLM

what about
two German scientists named Frans Fischer and Hans Tropsch developed a process (the Fischer-Tropsch Method) of processing coal to produce a liquid hydrocarbon fuel by reacting the carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and methane obtained from coal. The product was refined to create a synthetic fuel.
Or
The Vampir was not the first German Infrared System, but by the end of the war in 1945 it was the most compact and advanced system they had. The technology itself dates back to around the start of the war, when engineers developed the first infrared rangefinder for German light anti-tank artillery. This was improved and some heavier direct-fire artillery was equipped with it as well. By 1944 the Germans had developed a version flexible enough to be mounted on the Panther tank (Germany's most technologically advanced and complex tank) and by the last year of the war were ready to issue the man-portable Vampir system.
or
The Grand Slam (Earthquake) bomb was a very large bomb developed by the British aeronautical engineer Barnes Wallis in late 1944. The Grand Slam bomb was twice the weight of his previous large bomb, the Tallboy; both weapons were intended for use against large and protected buildings, and structures against which smaller bombs would be ineffective. The Grand Slam weighed nearly ten tonnes. It remains the heaviest bomb ever used in any conflict. (A.K.A the bunker buster)
or
In 1938, British engineer Alec Reeves (1902-1971) patented a system of communication that was an alternative to the "voice-shaped current" that was used to convey telephone communications. With pulse code modulation. It was implemented during World War II by Bell Labs as a secure means of communication between Roosevelt and Churchill. Reeves also worked in British intelligence, devising the first remote-controlled bombing device that brought about new levels of accuracy in bombs dropped from planes reaching their intended targets. This allowed the British to take out many German raw materials sites, and likely contributed decisively to the defeat of the Nazis. Pulse code modulation would later become the basis of all digital technology, and a British stamp was issued in its honor in 1969 as the capabilities of digital systems were beginning to be realized.
or
During World War One, he developed several types of solid-fuel rockets to be used in armed weapons. Weapons Goddard developed during WWI became the primary weapons utilized during WWII, i.e. bazooka. Goddard did not pioneer the first rocket. His investigations pioneered the way for modern rockets, space travel, and a whole new field in science and engineering.
I could go on and on about economic inventions or civil inventions. (hello the Audubon was made to move troops and equipment.) War Has alway spiked Invention or at least innovation. And after the wars are over that tec will be adapted by the civilian sector.

Korentin_Black wrote:Small note - the notion of innovation occuring during wartime is a popular myth.

~ Josh

Korentin_Black wrote:Every single one of which was an engineering adaption of /existing/ research... which is not to undermine the cleverness of the people involved.

People busy building armour and refining known-to-work processes and equipment are simply too busy to engage in flight-of-fancy pure research... that's just the way things are.

/Especially/ in a world so hanging-on-by-the-fingernails and already high-tech as Rifts.

Two points:

1]] At base, one could try and say (and, perhaps, make a good case) that EVERYTHING that exists in the Human Realm builds off of what was before.

That, in and of itself, is not a good Argument to therefore say that "..nothing innovative comes from War."

For example, some of our best Innovations in Medical Techhnology came from the horrendous Casualty Rates that the troops -both Union and Confederate -were suffering because they were going to the Field Hospitals (the so-called "Surgical Clean Room," for one thing; if memory serves, the use of Anesthetics was another).

2]] Necesity, as they say, is the mother of invention. Can you think of any better incentive for Human Innovation (besides, maybe, the acquisition of Food and Water) than ways to both kill the Enemy and keep your own Troops fighting as long as possible when they are subjected to the life-and-death situations of War??

I mean, it's not like we're developing ever deadlier Anti-Personnel Weps just because we want to grant the Enemy a quick and painless death, right???

Dunno... I take the K-1000 Spider or the Energy Lance (with its
9 kg and self-charging batteries) as original Kittanii stuff, and they
are viable items.

On the other hand, SG-1 offered some explanation about
high-tech vs low tech (the staff-weapon vs. the submachinegun),
and I guess the Kittanii designs are not as "ugly-war-winner"
stuff, but more like works of art, such as an engraved and
adorned double-barreled shotgun is hardly the most advanced
product of Earth.

Adios
KLM

Kikkoman wrote:II would just think that logically...

That was your mistake, you are applying logic to Rifts.

Kikkoman wrote:
are there other games that handle combat between people and giant robots?
Star Wars d20?

The West End Games version of Star Wars had a very good and simple system for dealing with damage between people, Robots, Star Fighters and Capitol class ships