Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 260: Roof Transplant Surgery Experimentation

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 260: Roof Transplant Surgery Experimentation

Roof transplant surgery in Automation is not an entirely new phenomenon, dating back to the introduction of mods that allow for the placement of a full roof set via a 3D fixture (or set thereof), but I've recently been intrigued by several possibilities in particular that involve this procedure. To get started, however, you must hide the stock turret - roof, pillars, windows, and window trim (along with other trim areas as appropriate, depending on the body set you're working with) - by setting their materials to transparent. With the entire turret now hidden from view, you can fill the void by placing, rotating, and resizing a 3D fixture roof where the stock item once was. Here's a pair of recent examples to prove my point.

Above, from top: This test build underwent roof transplant surgery to give it a roofline and fastback profile more befitting of its long-nosed, short-tailed shape - to say that it went well with the downward-sloping rear end was an understatement.

Here, I took the '96 Kompact (2.69 wheelbase) in fastback coupe/wraparound rear window configuration and hid the entire turret using the procedure described above, before filling in the resulting gap with a variant of SHD's 00s Euro Coupe Roof 3D fixture set (specifically, the one marked FER_575) and using decal patches and a rescaled wing mirror fixture to plug any holes in the bodywork. The resulting design looks and feels airier and more muscular than it would've with the stock roof, regardless of morphing settings - especially with the cab-rearward dash-to-axle ratio I eventually chose.

Another example of a body set that underwent a similarly drastic transformation is shown below.

Above: I'd originally wanted to use the same fixture variant (albeit with different scaling and rotation scalings) as I'd applied to the first example on this build based on the '92 Evade (2.53m wheelbase in notchback configuration, with a wraparound rear window) - but I ended up settling on a different variant (specifically, the one marked JAG_XKR) due to its more curvaceous profile gelling particularly well with the car's more rounded shape compared to the other possibilities I've tried.

To be fair, the result isn't quite perfect, what with the base of the A-pillar still overlapping with the base of the front windscreen, but it still works well enough. Nor are these the only combinations I've investigated recently - I've also examined other combinations in addition to these - but these two are a decent start, and could be refined and developed further to get even closer to my desired result. Here are two more examples (this time using mid-engined platforms) to prove my point.

Above, from top: Using the SHD Euro 90s Sports 3D fixture set (specifically, the relatively angular variant marked FER_355_BER) on a mid-engined variant of the wedge-shaped '86 Rosso worked surprisingly well, although I had to stretch the fixture longitudinally to accommodate the C-pillar base location I ended up choosing. Below, from top: In contrast, the '88 Copy Cat, which is far more curvaceous by comparison, is a perfect fit for the CHE_CORV_C6 variant of the SHD US 00s Sports 3D fixture set; I scaled it to fit after hiding the stock roof and pillars (which gave a narrower cabin than I thought was desirable) to give it an airier turret than usual.

In short, there is a place for roof transplant surgery in Automation - it's a vital tool for when you realize that even your best efforts can't provide a suitable roof/pillar profile with the stock morphing range of your chosen body set - but it has to be done carefully, since it will take a lot of time, practice, and patience to get right. Another caveat is that the new turret won't always exactly match the position and shape of the stock one (regardless of what morphing settings you gave the latter), so keep that in mind when you're also combining a roof transplant with a 3D fixture interior. Even so, if your skills are good enough, you might be able to combine the two to create a more detailed and intricate design than the game would normally allow.

MechDB Misadventures, Part 31: Low-Heat Timber Wolf Brawling

MechDB Misadventures, Part 31: Low-Heat Timber Wolf Brawling

With the Timber Wolf (Mad Cat) TBR-N(L) having recently being added to MechWarrior Online Legends as a Loyalty reward, I decided to explore some loadouts based on that chassis, including a few that utilize its full set of 8 OmniPods. After some deliberation, I came up with the following setups as potentially among of the most effective in their intended roles as close-range brawlers:

Above, from top: Two suggestions for close-range brawling builds based on the Timber Wolf TBR-N(L) loyalty variant. The former utilizes the Prime variant's arms to fit in two additional Clan Medium Pulse Lasers in place of two tons of surplus Clan SRM ammo, the Light Active Probe, and a half-ton of armor found in the latter's set of 8 build, thus trading heat efficiency and sustained firepower for longer range and extra alpha strike potential. The latter (which relies on the N variant's set of 8 OmniPods) lacks the extra pair of Clan Medium Pulse Lasers found in the former, but instead adds a half-ton of armor and a Light Active Probe in addition to two extra tons of Clan SRM ammo, with the regular Clan Machine Guns and their ammo swapped for Clan Heavy Machine Guns (with 1 ton of Clan HMG ammo for each), thus trading range for DPS output and heat efficiency while absorbing any excess mass.

Both builds are equally effective at close-range brawling - the choice is entirely yours as to whether you prefer stronger alpha strikes or greater combat endurance and heat efficiency. The Set of 8 build can also run Artemis IV-enhanced SRMs if you are willing to swap two tons of SRM ammo for the spare tonnage necessary for the resulting increase in accuracy. For a truly devilish mix of the two, however, you could take the former setup and give it the latter's Clan HMGs and Light Active Probe in place of regular Clan MGs, swapping out two Clan Double Heat Sinks to free up enough mass to make this change possible, and resulting in 66.6 damage per alpha strike, as shown below.

Above: This TBR-N hybrid build mixes elements of the first two to increase its maximum damage per second to 23.0, with a sustained DPS of 16.1 sitting between the 15.3 of the first suggestion and the 17.9 of the Set of 8 alternate loadout, while still fully utilizing its 12 tons of armor capacity and having enough spare mass for a Light Active Probe.

In short, the TBR-N(L), with its eclectic hardpoint mix, is just the ticket if you want a brawling Timber Wolf that doesn't use or even need Jump Jets in any of its OmniPods.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 259: A Birthday Gift to Myself

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 259: A Birthday Gift to Myself

On the weekend of my 34th birthday, I decided to treat myself to a special gift, or rather, four of them, with four fully detailed, 3D fixture-interior builds from the year of my birth (1992), each of which used a variant of one of two body sets (the rounded and curvaceous '87 Fatale, or the angular and wedge-shaped '86 Rosso) for their exterior. The body set choices were deliberate - I had to create one each of a front-engined and rear/mid-engined build on each set, with the additional requirement that no two builds using the same body set could have the same wheelbase length. Some of them are reworked versions of earlier designs, while others were built entirely from scratch, but all have manual transmissions and helical limited-slip differentials on a purely rear-wheel-drive layout. Here are a few group shots showing all four of them:

Above, from top: This is my idea of an Automation Class of 1992, as far as sports cars are concerned - the Kodai Kunai (red), Reuterberg R91 GT (yellow), WM Warlord R (green), and Macale M125 (blue) all showcase different design and engineering philosophies, but share a common goal and providing a unique and memorable experience for any enthusiastic driver.

The Kodai Kunai GTP Twin Turbo (red), with its 2.5-liter twin-turbocharged flat-six (chosen to replicate a two-chamber rotary engine as closely as possible), may be the slowest and least powerful (280 bhp) of the four, but is the most affordable at $45k AMU, with a five-speed gearbox as standard.

Above, from top: The Kodai Kunai GTP Twin Turbo may not be the quickest of the bunch, but it is among the prettiest, and it's also the lightest (1250kg) and cheapest.

Also using a flat-six for propulsion (except larger, at 3.6 liters, and mounted at the rear) is the Reuterberg R91 GT (yellow), which, though smaller, is slightly heavier (1340kg), but more powerful (360 bhp) and hence faster overall (thanks to its 6-speed gearbox), to justify its $50k AMU price.

Above, from top: The Reuterberg R91 GT is rear-engined and proud of it, leveraging its unique mechanical configuration for immense traction and fast launches.

Next up is the WM Warlord R (green), whose 7,0-liter normally-aspirated V8 sits up front and sends 450 horsepower to a six-speed manual gearbox. Combined with a full luxury interior instead of the premium setup seen in the previous two cars, it stickers for $55k AMU and weighs 1470kg.

Above, from top: Combining aspects of a sports car, supercar, muscle car, and grand tourer, the WM Warlord R has immense presence to match its oversized engine and its huge torque output.

Finally, the Macale M125 (blue) is the largest, heaviest, most powerful, and most expensive car here, at 1500kg, 500 horsepower, and $60k AMU respectively. Much of this is down to its mid-mounted naturally aspirated 5.0-liter V12, luxury interior, and close-ratio 5-speed manual gearbox combo.

Above, from top: There is nothing quite like the exquisite high-end feel of the Macale M125, whose sonorous V12 engine gives it unmatched speed and acoustics on the road and at the track.

Whereas the Kunai and R91 are built on advanced high-strength steel monocoque chassis (with the latter having treated steel bodywork, as opposed to the former's partial aluminum construction), the Warlord and M125 utilize a more traditional approach, with a galvanized steel space frame clad in fiberglass and aluminum panels respectively. The Kunai and Warlord, being front-engined, have multi-link rear suspension in place of the dual-wishbone rear ends of the R91 and M125. All four of them also have double wishbone front suspension for reduced camber changes during cornering, although the M125 lacks the variable-ratio hydraulic power steering setup found on the other three cars.

In short, building my vision of an Automationeer's Class of 1992 was a very fun experience, and something that I can build on by adding additional variants to each model and/or making the base trims even more detailed than they already are.

MechDB Misadventures, Part 30: All-Pulse Laser Brawlgoyles

MechDB Misadventures, Part 30: All-Pulse Laser Brawlgoyles

Due to having an oversized 400-rated Clan XL engine in a standard frame encased in Clan Ferro-Fibrous armor (of which it can carry up to 13 tons), the Gargoyle/Man O' War OmniMech in MechWarrior Online is generally best used as a relatively fast brawler, with a large number of smaller, lighter weapons instead of a few larger, heavier ones. With the introduction of the GAR-M(TSP) variant, this philosophy can be taken a step closer to its logical conclusion by combining its left arm with the C variant's right arm and the E variant's side torsos to yield 16(!) energy hardpoints. One suggestion using all of these hardpoints is as follows:

Above: Mixing the Gargoyle M's left arm with the C variant's left arm and the E variant's side torsos gives the 'Mech at least 16 energy hardpoints - filling them with a 50/50 mix of Micro and Small Pulse Lasers, while using 8 additional Clan Double Heat Sinks to absorb their heat load and spare tonnage capacity, creates a tough, yet fast brawler that can eviscerate anything in a close-range combat scenario, especially against slower targets.

Prior to the introduction of the M variant of the Gargoyle, one of the closest pure energy-based pulse laser brawl configuration to the one shown above was as follows:

Above: Before the GAR-M(TSP) debuted, this was closest we could get to a pure pulse laser-based brawling setup for the Gargoyle, and compared to the one above, it has longer range but is more heat-intensive, wiht only 20 heat sinks instead of 24.

There are other pure pulse laser-based builds based on this chassis besides these two, but the Small/Micro Pulse Laser-based one could well be one of the most effective ones MWO will ever see - as long as you leverage its 12.5 tons of armor and 81.0km/h speed to absorb or evade incoming fire while keeping your cluster of tiny little lasers trained on whatever victim is unfortunate to get in your sights.

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 all of my designs from the 4.24 version are incompatible with any 4.27 game build and are 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 (1962): $20m
• Round 3 (1967): $25m
• Round 4 (1970): $30m
• Round 5 (1975): $35m
• Round 6 (1982): $40m
• Round 7 (1987): $45m
• Round 8 (1992): $50m
• Round 9 (1999): $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 1-4: 6 Points
• Rounds 5-8: 8 Points
• Rounds 9-12: 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 (along with the future Terso build) that have debuted in the years since.

Update (August 7th, 2026, 10:35 am, UTC+7): I am proposing adding four more rounds, bringing the total to 16; however, several changes must be made to accommodate this.

Any item defined as "advanced technology" (which requires at least 5 techpool points to use in the current round) could be treated like an extra-cost option as follows:

• Rounds 1-8: Base price of $2000 + $500 per techpool point
• Rounds 9-16: Base Price of $5000 + $1000 per techpool point

This should prevent overreliance on these items throughout a company's entire lineup; in addition, the cost of using advanced technology could be halved for specialist manufacturers (to reflect their generally smaller output and/or real-life trickle-down effects).

In addition, using a body set with an unlock year that is at least one year newer than the car's model year (which I would've treated as any other form of advanced technology, but instead decided to give a smaller price penalty by comparison, given that using such items is much more commonplace than I thought), may incur a base price increase of $1000 AMU per year relative to the current model year, regardless of the current model year - another measure that could deter overuse and/or abuse of such items, although specialists may get to use such items at a 50% discount compared to other brands.

Finally, if, as I suspected, 14 rounds turns out to be insufficient, it may be possible to extend the competition to 16 rounds, with the new techpool allocations as follows:

• Round 1 (1946): $5m
• Round 2 (1952): $10m
• Round 3 (1956): $15m
• Round 4 (1962): $20m
• Round 5 (1967): $25m
• Round 6 (1970): $30m
• Round 7 (1975): $35m
• Round 8 (1982): $40m
• Round 9 (1987): $45m
• Round 10 (1992): $50m
• Round 11 (1999): $55m
• Round 12 (2002): $60m
• Round 13 (2007): $65m
• Round 14 (2013): $70m
• Round 15 (2017): $75m
• Round 16 (2020): $80m

This would necessitate an adjustment of price-dependent techpool bonuses and penalties, as follows:

• Round 1: No changes
• Rounds 2-8: -$5m (budget)/+5m (prestige)
• Rounds 9-15: -$10m (budget)/+$10m (prestige)
• Round 16: -$20m (budget)/+$20m (prestige)

Moreover, the maximum techpool point allocation per area would also have to change, as follows:

• Rounds 1-4: 7 Points
• Rounds 5-8: 8 Points
• Rounds 9-12: 9 Points
• Rounds 13-16: 10 Points

This extended season would not only be 33% longer than the original, but also cover the entire Automation timeline from 1947 to 2020 inclusive, giving a broader range of aesthetic and technological evolution than before, and thus providing a more representative snapshot of the game's scope.

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.