SturmFeur Concept Sketch
Added 2022-11-07 10:41:17 +0000 UTCTime for another Rec Guide vehicle. The SturmFeur!
A bit of an odd pick, but certainly an interesting looking one and a useful/focused loadout to land on the table.
I do have a question for the more experienced players though. This and the Catapult have the same BV2. The Catapult is faster, has JJ's, and only drops 10LRM tubes (and MGs) to gain 4 medium lasers. I assume the Sturm has a fair bit more armor.
What edge does the SturmFeur bring other than being 40% the cbill cost? Cbill cost makes it great lore wise for production and garrison, but what about from the game perspective?
Enjoy!
Comments
Every time you bring common sense to a Battletech table, God kills a Canopian Catgirl. Please, think of the catgirls....
Jarod DePastene
2022-11-29 18:46:02 +0000 UTCThe Succession Wars would be the best because they could lump 3025, 2750, 3026 AND even some stuff from 3058 into one convenient volume.
Tyler Erickson
2022-11-21 02:46:01 +0000 UTCThere will eventually be a Rec Guide compilation print book, and odds are they'll either remake TRO 3025, or a new edition of TRO Succession Wars.
Anthony Scroggins
2022-11-11 11:10:17 +0000 UTCUgh why doesn't CGL just reprint the tech manuals with the updated art. I don't want an ebook I WANT an actual book that I can sit down, lie down, curl up or whatever and read! Sorry for my bluntness.
Tyler Erickson
2022-11-09 19:41:43 +0000 UTCThe advantage is for players who field them in combined arms units in campaign and/or RPG games, and disadvantage is for games that are "mechs only", otherwise, that 40% cost difference is wasted.
George Velez
2022-11-09 19:27:36 +0000 UTCYou'll have to wait and see as the Rec Guides roll out :)
Anthony Scroggins
2022-11-09 10:32:31 +0000 UTCAlmost forgot, you've done the big missile tank but what about the little one, the Hunter Light Support Tank? Any plans?
Tyler Erickson
2022-11-08 16:23:45 +0000 UTCAre you thinking of doing the Engineering Vehicle from 3026?
Tyler Erickson
2022-11-08 16:22:16 +0000 UTCYeah they definitely like to do completionism when convenient.
Anthony Scroggins
2022-11-08 02:03:52 +0000 UTC4 under each hatch, but yep. The rear launcher is all top hinge.
Anthony Scroggins
2022-11-08 02:03:06 +0000 UTCIt seems, judging from the vehicles that you've been working on, that CGL has you focusing on the stuff from the 3025 and 3026 tech manuals.
Tyler Erickson
2022-11-07 19:25:04 +0000 UTC5 tubes under each hatch, with the hatches hinges alternating on the top or bottom?
KaiserDunk
2022-11-07 17:43:57 +0000 UTCWhat a fantastic improvement!
Christopher Kenna
2022-11-07 17:28:13 +0000 UTC‘Lore wise’ besides the cost and upkeep imagine the simplicity of training a crew to drive a tank around and have one person for each position versus the extensive expensive training that goes into a mechwarrior. Gameplay wise it’s another ‘don’t bring a tank to a mech fight’ and comes down to scenario and having a fun combined arms experience. Could definitely see fielding these as my indirect support and saving cbills for some other Battlemechs.
Fherot
2022-11-07 16:27:55 +0000 UTCThe Sturmfeur allows you to have a cheaper barrage vehicle, or two if your going c-bills. Park them behind a hill and fire, and until something comes looking for them, they are just as durable as a Mech. The Catapult is more durable, much more mobile and much more able to survive close combats due to it's lasers and lack of vehicle vulnerability. That being said I like the flavor of the Strumfeur much better. It's still in production, so parts aren't as much of an issue, and so as others said maintaining them is much easier.
William B Teter
2022-11-07 14:09:59 +0000 UTCTT Mechanics for your FLGS one shots? It has twice the armor of a Catapult, but that's it. But that's the problem with those TDM matches, they really only factor BV. No other considerations. It's an MtG match with Gobots instaed of pretty cards. In actual TT campaign play? That 4.5 million Cbill difference means in theory a commander can buy 2 Sturmfeurs for every one Catapult. They are also far cheaper and easier to maintain for most units. Doubly so if one considers that the Catapult is near extinct outside the Capellan Confederation, and damn rare even there. Flip side is you have to house and feed what.. 5 crewman for every Sturmfeur, vs 1 for a mech. Either way you're better off with an Archer, especially an ARC-2S. Same BV, better ammo endurance, better close range firepower than either (referring to the 2S) and it packs better armor than a Catapult, and better mobility than a Sturmfeur. And while not quite as cheap and easy to maintain as an ICE tank, unlike a Catapult, the Archer is ubiquitous, with parts everywhere, every tech knows how to work on one, etc. And 4 less mouths to feed than the tank.
Benjamin Myers (Bishop Steiner)
2022-11-07 13:58:49 +0000 UTCYeah, not high on my list for the reasons stated, but that does not mean i do jot respect the tank. Anything with twin LRM 20’s needs to be treated with care.
James Bixby
2022-11-07 13:29:15 +0000 UTCYep. It's not only got nearly twice the armor of a Catapult, but that armor is spread out over five hit locations instead of eight (plus another three if you count rear torso locations separately). The extra tubes give it a bit extra punch, and the ammo reserves, though not enormous, do at least allow for a full minute and a half of continuous fire, which is generally sufficient for short or sporadic engagements. The machine guns also do an acceptable job of keeping infantry away.
pokefan548
2022-11-07 13:29:03 +0000 UTCOoh! I like it!
John Kraemer
2022-11-07 13:19:07 +0000 UTC
