Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 258: Generations II Five Years On

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 258: Generations II Five Years On

Five years after wrapping up the Generations II challenge on the Automation Discourse, I began wondering how I'd rewrite the history of the Hampton Motor Group (my representative in that tournament) as a separate thread in the car design subforum using the current Al-Rilma stable release (in contrast to the obsolete pre-Ellisbury 4.24 build I was using at the time) if I were to do so. In fact, a remake or reimagining of those earlier designs would be a necessity in such a scenario, since my builds from the 4.24 version are incompatible and thus not transferable.

The original series had 12 rounds in total, so it would make sense for me to spotlight 12 critical years (each of which are 3-7 years apart, to set it apart from the source material where intervals between rounds were no more than 6 years long) in the company's history. To keep these "milestones" as close to the ones used in the original thread, I would suggest these model/trim years, with their respective company-wide combined techpool allocations (trim + engine) as follows:

• Round 1 (1955): $15m
• Round 2 (1960): $20m
• Round 3 (1965): $25m
• Round 4 (1970): $30m
• Round 5 (1975): $35m
• Round 6 (1982): $40m
• Round 7 (1987): $45m
• Round 8 (1992): $50m
• Round 9 (1998): $55m
• Round 10 (2002): $60m
• Round 11 (2007): $65m
• Round 12 (2013): $70m

This means that the combined techpool budget for the company would increase by $5m each round. However, budget (lower-priced) and prestige (higher-priced) segments could receive less and more techpool budget, respectively, than other segments, as follows, to align more closely with their price ranges:

• Rounds 1-6: -$5m (budget)/+5m (prestige)
• Rounds 7-12: -$10m (budget)/+$10m (prestige)

In addition, market segments could be classified according to price as follows, in keeping with my policy of making their positioning commensurate with their pricing:

• Budget: Lower-priced cars (compacts and subcompacts, regardless of body style) and lower-end performance cars of any kind (including sport compacts, which should ideally be a separate trim of an existing budget model). Smaller SUVs/crossovers and pickup trucks also belong here.
• Prestige: Higher-priced premium and luxury cars (including any high-performance variants of either), as well as trucks, crossovers, and SUVs. This also includes (usually) higher-end sports cars and grand tourers, in addition to supercars and hypercars.
• Standard: Includes mid-range family cars (sedans, wagons, hatchbacks, and minivans) and performance cars of various types that are priced between the budget and prestige brackets (including muscle/pony cars). Mid-priced utility body styles (trucks, SUVs, and crossovers) fall into this category.

Also, to avoid excessive min-maxing, the maximum techpool point allocation for any tab would most likely be set as follows:

• Rounds 1-2: 5 Points
• Rounds 3-4: 6 Points
• Rounds 5-6: 7 Points
• Rounds 7-8: 8 Points
• Rounds 9-10: 9 Points
• Rounds 11-12: 10 Points

Finally, unlike Generations II, this budget and class system would also cover specialist manufacturers, which could focus on just a few segments per round (sometimes as few as one, but usually no more than three), in contrast to a full line manufacturer, which would need to be represented in at least three segments per round (as in the original).

In short, looking back on Generations II shows how far the game and I have come since its conclusion, and gives me an insight on how a car company thread on the Discourse forums could evolve over time, based on the tournament's principles, but adapted to account for the changes introduced in the Ellisbury and, in more recent times, Al-Rilma game builds that have debuted in the years since

Infinite Space Insights: Graviton Beams and Their Tabletop Counterparts

Infinite Space Insights: Graviton Beams and Their Tabletop Counterparts

The Graviton Disintegrator in the Infinite Space trilogy is a unique weapon - not for its characteristics, but for being the only beam-based (and thus non-projectile-based) weapon of any kind ever fielded by the Yellow Kawangi, with each of their Dreadnoughts carrying four such weapons (two up front and two more at the rear). Due to its immense firepower, it (along with the Nova Cannon, which the Yellow Kawangi also fit to their Dreadnoughts, albeit only one per ship) can only be acquired during normal gameplay by creating it from a Timeless Bauble, and even under such circumstances, you'll never be able to have more than one. However, in custom scenarios, it's possible to arm most capital ships with multiple Graviton Disintegrators for a massive increase in damage per second. So how does this weapon work? Let's find out.

As a medium weapon, it can be installed on any capital ship that has at least one universal, medium or large turret. Most factions whose capital ships do not have weapons as fixed equipment are fitted with these turrets as standard, with the Calatians being the sole exception. Their Dreadnought and Super Dreadnought are the only capital ships from that faction with these features, whereas Calatian Cruisers and Destroyers lack such turrets and are thus incompatible with the Disintegrator. However, the Calatians' near-exclusive focus on short- to medium-range combat makes their larger capital ships a good fit for a Disintegrator-based loadout; a Dreadnought or Super Dreadnought armed with one (or, in the latter case, two) of these Yellow Beams of Death (as the player base calls them) can be extremely dangerous to any target that ventures too close to it.

In terms of operating principle, the Graviton Disintegrator emits graviton particles to pull its victims apart through inducing an immense gravitational pull at the point of impact, causing the target to collapse under its own mass. This echoes how its Warhammer 40000 equivalent, the Graviton Destructor and Ruinator, works against small targets (although larger targets are generally immune), with Titan-scale Horus Heresy-era equivalents being potent enough to obliterate other Titans. Similarly, the Graviton Disintegrator is explicitly stated to not having any known defenses against it. This explains why it is inadvisable to attack a Yellow Kawangi Dreadnought at close or even medium range - the Disintegrators will simply tear up any ship that's close enough, so a long-range assault with multiple missile-based weapons (or even a single Nova Cannon or Cobalt Torpedo Tube) is the only viable option for countering such a massive ship without having to use a Limited Vacuum Collapser to overwrite it.

Above, from top: The Graviton Disintegrator in the Infinite Space trilogy may not have the range or availability of the Tachyon Ray Gun, but it is vastly superior in terms of damage per second.

The closest BattleTech equivalent to the Graviton Disintegrator (in terms of firepower) would be the Binary Laser Cannon. Essentially a pair of regular Large Lasers fused together (but weighing 9 tons instead of 10 for dual individual Large Lasers), it generated too much heat relative to the amount of damage delivered compared to a pair of Large Lasers. However, it became viable again after Double Heat Sinks reentered production following the distribution of the contents of the Helm Memory Core, and in MechWarrior Online it serves as a shorter-ranged, but lighter, alternative to paired Large Lasers.

Within the context of MWO, two Binary Laser Cannons (which are distinguished by their white beams) should be sufficient for most Heavy and Assault 'Mechs; some chassis can safely handle three, but four is generally overkill in terms of mass and cooling requirements. However, in the right hands, Binary Lasers can be even more effective than any other Large Laser within their range profile. A common strategy is to combine a pair of Binary Lasers with several Inner Sphere Extended Range Medium Lasers, thus providing a viable backup option and good range synergy.

Above: This Stalker STK-7D is a good example of a Binary Laser-based build in MWO, where the ER Medium Lasers serve as backup for its main armament - a pair of Binary Laser Cannons that complement the Medium Lasers perfectly in terms of range profile.

In short, Graviton Disintegrators may be among the rarest weapons in the Infinite Space trilogy, but they can be among the most potent in the player's inventory if they can acquire one, by performing a similar function to graviton-based weapons and Binary Lasers in Warhammer 40000 and BattleTech, respectively, as among the deadliest beam weapons (if not the deadliest) in their respective fictional universes.

MechDB Misadventures, Part 29: Using Component Armor to Absorb Unused Mass

MechDB Misadventures, Part 29: Using Component Armor to Absorb Unused Mass

Although MechWarrior Online does not (yet) support Component Armor, adapting it from the BattleTech tabletop game would be straightforward, since it only requires 0.5 tons of extra mass per critical slot for any component (except for the cockpit, which requires 1 ton per critical slot), and its ability for each affected critical slot to absorb a critical hit before being exposed would most likely be simulated by a per-slot durability buff. For example, adding Component Armor to a Medium Laser (which would normally weigh 1 ton and occupy 1 critical slot) would increase its mass to 1.5 tons. However, this upgrade costs 150,000 C-Bills for every critical slot that the resulting armored component occupies. In any case, for those that can afford it (in terms of spare tonnage and cost), it'd be a great way to use surplus mass for reducing critical hit probability.

Here's a simple example to show where component armor can be useful. This Jenner JR7-F has been configured as follows:

Above: This loadout for the Jenner JR7-F is a ton underweight - but that spare ton of mass can be used for component armor in some places.

Despite having a mass limit of 35 tons, this setup weighs 34 tons - 1 less than its maximum capacity in terms of tonnage. However, even though every critical slot on this loadout is occupied, we can still reach our 35-ton target by installing 1 ton of component armor. There are three main ways this armor can be allocated throughout the 'Mech:

• 0.5 tons for each shoulder actuator (to make each arm more difficult to blow off)
• 0.5 tons for each hip actuator (to make each leg less likely to fall off in the event of a critical hit)
• 1 ton for the cockpit (thus forcing any attacking unit to score two critical hits to destroy it)

All three of these options are as attractive as they are effective - the former two ensure that the 'Mech's firepower and agility, respectively, are less likely to be compromised while it's under fire, and the last of these improves the crew's chance of survival in any situation where its cockpit is more likely to be targeted directly. There's only enough spare tonnage for one of these choices, though, so you must choose carefully as to where you'll apply the 1 ton of component armor this loadout can carry. Just for fun, armoring every non-structural component (i.e., anything not occupied by its endo-steel structure or ferro-fibrous armor) on this loadout requires 15.5 tons of component armor - nearly half of the 'Mech's total mass, and 14.5 more than what it can safely carry.

In short, armored components may be heavier and more expensive (on a per-critical slot basis) than regular ones, but they can be useful in safeguarding against critical hits.

MechDB Misadventures, Part 28: Zombie Grasshoppers

MechDB Misadventures, Part 28: Zombie Grasshoppers

It didn't take long for me to revisit the idea of the Grasshopper GHR-5H as a true Zombie 'Mech (BattleTech slang for a BattleMech that carries energy weapons exclusively, along with a standard engine and enough heat sinks and armor to maintain an adequate level of survivability and sustainability) and add more firepower to it. The resulting loadout is as follows:

Above: A more lore-accurate take on my custom Grasshopper GHR-5H setup, now with a tabletop-accurate 280-rated engine for a bit more speed, and dual ER PPCs combined with five medium lasers to make it more of a bracket build (PPCs for long range, medium lasers for shorter ranges). Despite having one less heat sink, it's still a viable build under tabletop rules (I used an ASP to simulate a tabletop-sized Beagle Active Probe for this one, even though it requires one fewer critical slot and must be placed in the head under MechWarrior Online MechLab rules).

Taking the idea further, I could create a hypothetical GHR-5E variant that swaps the left torso AMS slot for a Guardian ECM slot, to accommodate such a system where the AMS once resided, and move the arm-mounted medium lasers to the center torso and head, thus forcing the Beagle Active Probe to be mounted in the right torso. The result has a narrower profile for all practical purposes, since the arms don't carry any equipment, although it runs hotter than the original quad-ER Large Laser build, so you'll need to manage your heat more efficiently to exploit its potential.

In short, although more heat-intensive, this Grasshopper variant proposal is not only faster, but harder-hitting, with actual headchopper potential - and nobody would want to underestimate those attributes when applied to any heavy or assault 'Mech.

MechDB Misadventures, Part 27: Patience, Grasshopper!

MechDB Misadventures, Part 27: Patience, Grasshopper!

I recently gave MechDB another try and attempted to create a loadout for the Grasshopper GHR-5H that would translate well to BattleTech tabletop rules, even though it might not necessarily be as effective in MechWarrior Online. Eventually, I came up with this all-energy setup with four ER Large Lasers (two per side torso), a standard Medium Laser in the center torso, 16 Double Heat Sinks (two of them in each side torso, and another one in each arm, to complement the 10 heat sinks built into its 270-rated standard engine), an AMS (Anti-Missile System) to simulate a Beagle Active Probe, four jump jets, and 13.5 tons of standard armor over an Endo-Steel internal structure, as follows:

Above: A proposal for a tabletop-friendly Grasshopper GHR-5H build I created in MechDB. While its relatively low combined alpha strike damage (41 points under MWO rules) and absence of melee functionality might make it ill-suited to the game, even when considering its excellent heat capacity and numerous quirks, its zombie status (bestowed upon it due to having a standard engine and an all-energy loadout, with a center torso-mounted Medium Laser as a backup weapon that remains usable even if both side torsos are blown off) and the more generous heat generation rules (such as the absence of MWO's heat scaling and Double Heat Sinks providing a 100% per-item heat capacity increase instead of MWO's 40%), when combined with hand actuators for improved melee accuracy, make it very annoying to face in combat, especially if you swap the AMS with a Beagle Active Probe to give it the ability to detect ECM-equipped units.

Under tabletop rules, this loadout can dissipate 32 heat per turn (2 per Double Heat Sink) while generating only 51 heat during an alpha strike (55 if jumping while performing such an action), for a net heat buildup of only 23 per turn, making alpha strike salvos more sustainable. A Grasshopper GHR-5H so equipped could serve as a highly mobile sniper or skirmisher, and could be more survivable due to carrying as much standard armor as a 70-ton heavy 'Mech can have (13.5 tons as opposed to the 13 found in the stock setup).

In short, for combining maximum durability and immense staying power with surprising agility during the Clan Invasion era, this customized Grasshopper GHR-5H is tough to beat on the tabletop, regardless of whether you fill the 1.5 tons and 2 critical slots of unused mass and space, respectively, with an Anti-Missile System or Beagle Active Probe. With a few tweaks to the loadout to make it better suited to the faster-paced gameplay style of MechWarrior Online, it can be equally effective there, too, if you're brave enough to trade durability for speed with the following setup:

Above: Swapping the 270-rated standard engine for a 325-rated Extralight (XL) unit reduces this Grasshopper GHR-5H variant's survivability somewhat, but increases its top speed frees up extra mass for the fitment of two more medium lasers; upgrading them (along with the single center torso-mounted one) to extended-range versions helps them synergize better with the four Large Lasers, which have been downgraded to regular items to improve heat efficiency. Also, with the presence of heat scaling in MWO and a milder 40% heat efficiency bonus for double heat sinks (as opposed to the tabletop game's 100%), the extra heat sink is much appreciated here.

There are many other Grasshopper variants in MWO that can run these exact loadouts, but the GHR-5H is one of the most (if not the most) flexible variant out there. So go ahead and try out some Grasshoppers if you get the chance - you won't be disappointed!

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 257: One-Ton Wonder

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 257: One-Ton Wonder

With the Parana P600 and LVC LS60 under my belt, I decided to ask myself a question that I had been thinking about for months: what if I could combine the former's styling with the latter's engine, in a smaller platform? Right from the outset, the first problem that I wanted to deal with was the car's physical size. Both of those builds were quite large, with a width of around 2.0 meters and a wheelbase of over 2.6 meters. This made them heavier than I had intended to be; even the latter weighed 1.1 metric tons, and while this was 160 kilograms less than the P600, it still seemed a bit too much for me. So, I decided to apply the lessons I learned from both cars to create the Macale Imperia - revisiting a Kee-era manufacturer name, but reimagined for Al-Rilma with a nameplate last used on a now-deprecated build from the pre-Ellisbury UE4 days, and made possible in this latest game build due to nearly everything made prior to the Ellisbury update being rendered non-canon.

Above, from top: In response to any criticism that the Parana P600 and the LVC LS60 were too large and heavy, I decided to combine the best attributes of both in the 1995 Macale Imperia - a smaller, lighter car than either, combining the former's styling with the latter's lightweight interior and smaller, higher-revving engine, complete with a 10,000 rpm redline.

Although built on the '88 Copy Cat like the P600, with very similar styling, the Imperia uses the smaller 2.53m wheelbase variant in fastback configuration instead of any of the larger 2.64m wheelbase variants. This results in an even lighter curb weight (exactly 1000kg), giving it a 500bhp/ton power-to-weight ratio in its final form, and thus making it even more eager to get up and go from a standstill or dance around corners, especially with modestly sized 305/35ZR18 rear tires and a 42.5%/57.5% front/rear weight distribution. While it retains the full carbon-fiber body/chassis and manually adjustable four-wheel inboard A-arm suspension of its inspirations, its size (or lack thereof) is its greatest asset, being 200mm narrower, and thus making it less unwieldy in confined spaces. Finally, its suspension. though relatively softly sprung by default, can be set up to be stiffer if necessary.

In short, the Macale Imperia is the ultimate embodiment of what I think an ideal supercar should be: relatively small and light, with a great naturally aspirated engine hooked up to an equally stimulating (preferably manual) transmission driving the rear wheels, and just the right amount of electronic intervention (or even none at all) to keep things in check.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 256: An Agile Albatross

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 256: An Agile Albatross

Migrating to Al-Rilma for the latest stable build of Automation created a few problems, to say the least. In particular, many of my Ellisbury-era builds were either unviable or needed major revision. The 1962 AMS Albatross was a clear example of the latter, being largely based on my earlier KMA KS20 aesthetically, but with a fiberglass body and a smaller engine to cater to the requirements of a Discourse challenge. Its 1989 namesake, meanwhile, is now called the EMR ECT4, and has also been revised accordingly.

As for the 1962 Albatross, its lighter weight helps it more easily leverage what little power its smaller engine develops - and vastly improves the driving experience. Being quicker off the mark and through the corners was an inevitability, but in the context of the challenge in which it was submitted, where it was one of a few cars with at least 100 horsepower, it was enough to justify its $18,000 AMU price (the highest allowed) with ease. Key to its performance is the fitment of tubular headers and dual DCOE carburetors, yielding a 110-horsepower output harnessed using radial tires (again, to meet challenge requirements) and a 4-speed manual gearbox (to save weight, and also because a fifth gear would've been overkill given the era in which the car was launched). I had toyed with submitting a lighter mid-engined car in its place, but felt that it wasn't enough of an improvement over a single flying lap by comparison to deem it worthwhile.

Above, from top: Reimagining the AMS Albatross as a 1960s sports car with a fiberglass body made perfect sense, since it more closely aligned with its avian name.

On the other hand, the EMR ECT4 was more faithful to its progenitor, retaining the steel/aluminum body it once had, along with a turbocharged iron-block/alloy-head 16-valve straight-four driving all four wheels via a helical center differential.

Above, from top: The first car that bore the Albatross nameplate is now called the EMR ECT4, with extensive mechanical revisions to make it suitable for Al-Rilma.

In short, both of these cars may have come from different eras and aimed at two distinct market segments, but they are united in their quest to put smiles on drivers' faces at reasonable prices.