Black Knight rising, Obsolete and awesome. Options

[FuelDrop]

I was looking at the old Ares Air-Supply Drone thread, and pulled out my runner's black book. As I was leafing through it I spotted the Black Knight drone, and did a double-take.

One of the big balance complaint about the Air-Supply was that it had 6 body on a drone under 10k. Then I saw the Black Knight, and it has... 14. Body.
on a 40k drone.
Sure it doesn't have enough standard upgrades to be an off-the-shelf success, but with 14 mod slots (as opposed to most drones 4) I doubt it'll be an issue for anything other than price.
Thoughts?

[CanRay]

I know I want a few for keeping kids off my lawn. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[FuelDrop]

yup. they just don't make them like they used to.

[CanRay]

For a good reason. Flimsier models need more maintenance, spare parts, replacement... Profit!

[pbangarth]

A different perspective: it wasn't the Tiger tanks that won WWII, it was the tens or hundreds of times as many Shermans and T-34s rolling like rabbits off the assembly lines.

[CanRay]

A different perspective: it wasn't the Tiger tanks that won WWII, it was the tens or hundreds of times as many Shermans and T-34s rolling like rabbits off the assembly lines.

True enough. Of course, a used Black Knight is like gold with how well it's made and how tough it is.

And, with Used Car Lot's ability to remove that negative quality it has, even up-to-date!

[FuelDrop]

I think that the real appeal to runners from an investment point of view is both that the Black Knight is made to last (It can take 20 armour and 10 smart armour easily), and potential firepower (It can have two heavy remote turrets with some of the most powerful weapons in the game installed, something that even the best armed lesser drones are struggling to compete with). It's a money sink, sure, but it can give as good as it takes and come back for more, so you're far more likely to be repairing it than replacing it.
After all, it's almost as tough as some troll PCs! (Only almost (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) )

It is literally a small tank, and if your enemy isn't specially equipped to deal with it then you've almost won just by showing up with it.

Of course, the catch is that people tend to notice someone driving a tank through the streets, so the moment you deploy it you can kiss stealth goodbye.

[StealthSigma]

yup. they just don't make them like they used to.

Yeah. I know. Today's kids just aren't like we were growing up. Noisy. Crazy. Sloppy. Lazy. Loafers.

[almost normal]

A different perspective: it wasn't the Tiger tanks that won WWII, it was the tens or hundreds of times as many Shermans and T-34s rolling like rabbits off the assembly lines.

T-34s were a damned good tank though. IIRC they only lost 4 tanks for every german tank kill, which was fairly impressive given the opponent. I'd like to say the Joe Stalins faired even better, but I don't have my books with me to confirm that.

[pbangarth]

T-34s were a damned good tank though. IIRC they only lost 4 tanks for every german tank kill, which was fairly impressive given the opponent. I'd like to say the Joe Stalins faired even better, but I don't have my books with me to confirm that.

Yeah, some great design innovations. And they sacrificed pretty and bells-and-whistles for simple to fix and many... many.... many more. One wonders why modern theorists don't recall the results of that "experiment" pitting high maintenance high tech versus overwhelming numbers. 4 to 1 losses are a win when you produce at 10 to 1.

This is perfectly applicable to Shadowrun, too: massed agents in the Matrix, a faceful of watcher spirits, a swarm of little drones, or that gang of wannabes you paid to bum rush your opponent.

[CanRay]

"Quantity has a quality all its own." - Stalin

[FuelDrop]

This is perfectly applicable to Shadowrun, too: massed agents in the Matrix, a faceful of watcher spirits, a swarm of little drones, or that gang of wannabes you paid to bum rush your opponent.

I see your gang wannabes and raise you three initiative passes worth of suppression fire/gas grenades/other crowd control tactics...
Mass numbers work if you use them cleverly, but unless your bum-rush is just to keep them pinned while you snipe them then all you're going to be doing against competent opponents with reasonable reserves of ammunition or weapons is increasing your own notoriety... unless you have enough fodder that they'll run out of firepower before you run out of guys. At that point it becomes a great strategy, though not one likely to inspire love and loyalty from your troops.

Moral: If you're going to hammer your foe with superior numbers, pull all the stops and hit them with everything you can beg borrow and steal. there's no point in 'almost' having enough guys to get the job done, after all.

[pbangarth]

Mass numbers work if you use them cleverly,......
Moral: If you're going to hammer your foe with superior numbers, pull all the stops and hit them with everything you can beg borrow and steal. there's no point in 'almost' having enough guys to get the job done, after all.

I agree wholeheartedly.

[FuelDrop]

Of course, that's why you never want to REALLY piss off the corps: They can bring superior quality AND quantity to bear against you...

[StealthSigma]

T-34s were a damned good tank though. IIRC they only lost 4 tanks for every german tank kill, which was fairly impressive given the opponent. I'd like to say the Joe Stalins faired even better, but I don't have my books with me to confirm that.

7:1 in 1941
6:1 in 1942
4:1 in 1943/1944
1.2:1 in 1945

The 4:1 ratio happened after the disaster at Stalingrad. The T-34s also had some ludicrous maintenance issues which had them running unprecedented non-combat losses. The 4:1 kill ratio really wasn't sustainable in 1943 for the Soviets either so pretty damn good wasn't good enough. It was a bit better in 1944 once the allied bombings of German manufacturing centers slowed their tank production though the Germans could have countered that by producing anti-tank guns instead of tanks which was something around 6 guns for every 1 tank. The German problem was that they always felt they could go on the offensive and did not really accept a defensive option. There were only a few German generals that recognized the value of a defense in the Blitzkrieg era of war.

[pbangarth]

I didn't realize the ratio changed that much through the years. Can you point me somewhere to read up on it, StealthSigma?

[StealthSigma]

I didn't realize the ratio changed that much through the years. Can you point me somewhere to read up on it, StealthSigma?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Russian-Tanks-Worl...I/dp/0711028982

There's a couple of things to keep in mind though. The out of combat losses were unprecedented but their crews were also poorly trained and their generals were generally crap thanks to the Soviet purges and the high losses of combat experienced commanders in the early parts of the war.

The Germans were also rather clever about their usage of anti-tank guns as well so I'm not sure how much of that ratio is pure tank vs tank or just a counting up of lost tanks vs killed tanks regardless of kill method. A large part of the Soviet success in 1943+ came from the fact that the German high command still believed they could take the offensive and had a firm belief in not giving up an inch of land when their ability to go on the offensive was practically destroyed thanks to Stalingrad and el Alamein and the land they were trying to hold wasn't the most defensible. I said it earlier, but the Germans could have produce about 6 anti-tank guns for every Panzer they were able to produce and had the shifted their production to less mobile/more defensive material and would yield ground that wasn't easy to defend, they could have held much better on the Eastern Front and in Italy.

[almost normal]

Americans were of course better at killing tanks then Russians, or even Germans. No tank destroyer grouping ever had more tank losses then the tanks they were facing, which is a fairly impressive streak.

[StealthSigma]

Americans were of course better at killing tanks then Russians, or even Germans. No tank destroyer grouping ever had more tank losses then the tanks they were facing, which is a fairly impressive streak.

Oh god yes. The M10 and M36 were remarkable machines and they were the tanks for fighting against armor by US doctrine.

[Modular Man]

Back to the topic:

It is literally a small tank, and if your enemy isn't specially equipped to deal with it then you've almost won just by showing up with it.

Of course, the catch is that people tend to notice someone driving a tank through the streets, so the moment you deploy it you can kiss stealth goodbye.

Yes, a tank. You'd need very good tactics if you plan on using one of these in a city not owned by you... That is undoubtedly its greatest disadvantage.
Yet it is a great option when somebody really pushes an escalation: This is still a tank!

And then there's the "Assembly Time Improvement" modification for a mere 1000 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Rebuild your very own tank in about 70 minutes!

But, well, this is nothing you couldn't do with a stolen heavy car and some basic modifications.

[CanRay]

Pick-up Truck, make a Technical.

Of course, a Technical has a larger "footprint" than a Black Knight Drone.

[StealthSigma]

Back to the topic:

Yes, a tank. You'd need very good tactics if you plan on using one of these in a city not owned by you... That is undoubtedly its greatest disadvantage.
Yet it is a great option when somebody really pushes an escalation: This is still a tank!

And then there's the "Assembly Time Improvement" modification for a mere 1000 (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nuyen.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Rebuild your very own tank in about 70 minutes!

But, well, this is nothing you couldn't do with a stolen heavy car and some basic modifications.

Can you make a submersible, flying, spaceworthy tank?

[Modular Man]

No.
I haven't even finished my idea for a submersible mech. Always running out of slots. Annoys me to no end.

[Dreadlord]

Can you make a submersible, flying, spaceworthy tank?

LAV? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/spin.gif)

[Sengir]

The T-34s also had some ludicrous maintenance issues which had them running unprecedented non-combat losses.

Still better than the oh-so great (according to your average Military Channel program) Panthers and Tigers, whose only saving grace is that they are supreme examples of the European tendency for overengineering...well, HyperLAN came close to challenging that role, but failed even in that regard (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)


@Topic: Reminds me again why I hate having just one attribute for size, soaking, modifiability and some other stuff...