A new force in Iowa

Show off your armies and weaponry and stuff.

Moderators: Zahru II, Natalya

A new force in Iowa

Postby Piroko » Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:26 pm

From the embarked troops of the Republic Star Destroyer Radiant, comes this humble detachment...

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p280 ... 00306s.jpg

Including:

* All four squads of Aurek Platoon, 2nd Heavy Weapons Company, 1st Infantry Battalion, of the RSD Radiant Infantry Regiment (for a total of 36 clones, all of them apparently angry).

* Two squads of walker mobile repeating blasters from Cresh Platoon, 2nd Heavy Weapons Company, 1st Infantry Battalion, of the RSD Radiant Infantry Regiment.

* And finally all of 1st Squadron, 4th Repulsorlift Company, 191st Alderaanian Expeditionary Battalion, attached to the RSD Radiant Infantry Regiment (with their four repulsorlift tank destroyers to make things interesting).


To those in Iowa or close proximity, I'd be up for staging a match at Demicon, AI, Gamicon, or Icon if anyone is in the area.
Last edited by Piroko on Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:30 am, edited 3 times in total.
TROLOLO
Piroko
Champion
Champion
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:16 pm

Postby birdman » Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:34 am

very nice army. i like the military organisation of it.
welcome to the forums.
Image
User avatar
birdman
Galidor
Galidor
 
Posts: 1227
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 9:29 am

Postby Piroko » Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:13 am

birdman wrote:very nice army. i like the military organisation of it.
welcome to the forums.


Yeah and thank you. It started out rather small but after a battle with a friend of mine and his huge force of Indiana Jones Germans I decided I needed whole formations rather then random loose squads, so I started reading up on Wookieepedia about the actual sizes of Republic formations.

A Grand Army of the Republic squad is 9 soldiers, and a platoon is 36 with no supernumerary Lieutenant (in the Galactic Empire the officer and platoon sergeant are supernumerary, so a formation of 36 becomes 38 ).

So what I have here is the fictitious 2nd Heavy Weapons Company, which would consist of 2 platoons of 36 soldiers and 2 platoons of walkers (each consisting of a variable number of 4 walker/8 man squads with a small command squad).

I kick myself now for not buying more of the phase II clone boxes when they were still readily available in stores.
TROLOLO
Piroko
Champion
Champion
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:16 pm

Postby Piroko » Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:54 pm

I've acquired more walker kits (actually the last ones I could find in the city...), and thought I'd post the variants I've come up with.

Since the Lego clone walker is unnamed (it's not an AT-RT, because that's a single-seater) I'm calling these all AT-MIs (All Terrain Mechanized Infantry).

AT-MI/a (Artillery)
Equipped with a downsized version of the AT-AP's rail cannon, the standard AT-MI light repeating blaster, and two defensive concussion missiles, the AT-MI/a is designed for heavy fire support and can double as a tank destroyer
Image
Image

AT-MI/s (Suppression)
The AT-MI/s is designed for urban infantry support and anti-riot duty. In addition to the standard blaster, it carries a formidable twin blaster cannon on a traversing mount, two defensive concussion missiles, and a low-gain communications system for working in areas of high interference.
Image
Image

AT-MI/t (Tactical)
The AT-MI/t was designed with an eye towards special operations. It's equipped with larger concussion missiles than other AT-MI designs, a single coaxial heavy blaster cannon, a low gain comm system with a whip antenna, and the ubiquitous light repeating blaster common to all AT-MI units. Because of the fixed, centerline mounting of the main gun, the AT-MI/t has a higher top speed than its peers.
Image
Image
TROLOLO
Piroko
Champion
Champion
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:16 pm

Postby lrdofbricks » Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:06 am

Piroko wrote:AT-MI/t (Tactical)
The AT-MI/t was designed with an eye towards special operations. It's equipped with larger concussion missiles than other AT-MI designs, a single coaxial heavy blaster cannon, a low gain comm system with a whip antenna, and the ubiquitous light repeating blaster common to all AT-MI units. Because of the fixed, centerline mounting of the main gun, the AT-MI/t has a higher top speed than its peers.
Image
Image



WOULDNT IT BE SLOWER BECUASE IT OFF BALANCE? THE FIRST ONE HAS GUNS ON EITHER SIDE SO THEY BALANCE IT OUT AND KEEP IT STRAIT. THIS ONCE WOULD LEAN TO THE LEFT BECAUSE THERE TWO MISSILES ON THAT SIDE AND NO COUNTER-SUPPORT ON THE OTHER SIDE!
Image
LEGION- fear it
the 100000 post- by me
"manliness= X(warhead+piltog)^2/James+burgandy"
User avatar
lrdofbricks
Jaw-Jaw
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 8:35 am
Location: delaWhere?

Postby Piroko » Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:06 am

lrdofbricks wrote:WOULDNT IT BE SLOWER BECUASE IT OFF BALANCE? THE FIRST ONE HAS GUNS ON EITHER SIDE SO THEY BALANCE IT OUT AND KEEP IT STRAIT. THIS ONCE WOULD LEAN TO THE LEFT BECAUSE THERE TWO MISSILES ON THAT SIDE AND NO COUNTER-SUPPORT ON THE OTHER SIDE!


The Artillery model is very heavily off-center. The cannon on the left hand side is not matched by weight on the right hand side.

The Suppression unit has its weight centered but the turret is controlled by the gunner, not the driver, so to move while firing the balance gets all ****ed up due to the gun's recoil coming from all angles, and there have to be limiters on the legs to prevent them from kicking the guns.

The Tactical model's missiles are yes heavier then those of the other two. But they are nowhere near as heavy as the cannon on the arty model. You'll also note if you look very carefully at the rear of the tactical model's underchassis, that I've added an extra block of 1x2 handlegrips and some other stuff basically amounting to a bigger engine.


You'll note that in my original post I said: "Because of the fixed, centerline mounting of the main gun"

I had two juxtapositional statements in that phrase, not one. Fixed AND Centerline. The first is just as important as the second. Having a low slung gun that moves (when the gun is a significant fraction of the total weight) is little help. Having a fixed gun that's high off the ground and off center doesn't help at all either. The tactical model has neither. The missiles don't impart significant recoil and any recoil the gun imparts is nearly centered and below the center of gravity for the whole vehicle.

(Ignoring the core rules....) The Tactical model can run at an enemy, firing. The Suppression model can slog along blasting enemies on either side. The Artillery model has to park and stabilize itself, and then can rip off shots that will throw the enemy into next week.
TROLOLO
Piroko
Champion
Champion
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 8:16 pm

Postby IVhorseman » Fri Mar 27, 2009 11:35 am

Piroko wrote:
lrdofbricks wrote:WOULDNT IT BE SLOWER BECUASE IT OFF BALANCE? THE FIRST ONE HAS GUNS ON EITHER SIDE SO THEY BALANCE IT OUT AND KEEP IT STRAIT. THIS ONCE WOULD LEAN TO THE LEFT BECAUSE THERE TWO MISSILES ON THAT SIDE AND NO COUNTER-SUPPORT ON THE OTHER SIDE!


The Artillery model is very heavily off-center. The cannon on the left hand side is not matched by weight on the right hand side.

The Suppression unit has its weight centered but the turret is controlled by the gunner, not the driver, so to move while firing the balance gets all ****ed up due to the gun's recoil coming from all angles, and there have to be limiters on the legs to prevent them from kicking the guns.

The Tactical model's missiles are yes heavier then those of the other two. But they are nowhere near as heavy as the cannon on the arty model. You'll also note if you look very carefully at the rear of the tactical model's underchassis, that I've added an extra block of 1x2 handlegrips and some other stuff basically amounting to a bigger engine.


You'll note that in my original post I said: "Because of the fixed, centerline mounting of the main gun"

I had two juxtapositional statements in that phrase, not one. Fixed AND Centerline. The first is just as important as the second. Having a low slung gun that moves (when the gun is a significant fraction of the total weight) is little help. Having a fixed gun that's high off the ground and off center doesn't help at all either. The tactical model has neither. The missiles don't impart significant recoil and any recoil the gun imparts is nearly centered and below the center of gravity for the whole vehicle.

(Ignoring the core rules....) The Tactical model can run at an enemy, firing. The Suppression model can slog along blasting enemies on either side. The Artillery model has to park and stabilize itself, and then can rip off shots that will throw the enemy into next week.


You did it wrong. A good response to an wall of ALL CAPS text is at most one sentence long.
User avatar
IVhorseman
If she don't want the brick, she won't get the dick
If she don't want the brick, she won't get the dick
 
Posts: 6648
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:12 pm
Location: The Abyss

Postby pesgores » Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:08 pm

Very impressive!
"You can get more of what you want with a kind word and a gun, that you can with just a kind word." - Al Capone
My official post number 1000 was "The whole battle?"
Image
User avatar
pesgores
The Dear Leader
 
Posts: 3262
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:47 am
Location: Looking for baseplates

Postby tahthing » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:14 pm

your AT-MI gun doesn't "traverse" it rotates, i know this since i climb, traverse is to go across(bouldering)
non-traverse is to go up.
Last edited by tahthing on Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"some people are like slinkies there really good for nothing, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs"
"Triangalism! What's the fuckin' point!"
Spoiler: show
I am the muffinman
User avatar
tahthing
Mega Blok
 
Posts: 1306
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:02 pm
Location: Supprised this account isn't

Postby OneEye589 » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:35 pm

tahthing wrote:your AT-MI gun doesn't "travers" it rotates, i know this since i climb, travers is to go across(bouldering)
non-travers is to go up.


Travers?

I'm assuming you meant traverse.
User avatar
OneEye589
Pooplord
 
Posts: 4255
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 6:35 pm
Location: New York

Postby tahthing » Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:36 pm

OneEye589 wrote:
tahthing wrote:your AT-MI gun doesn't "travers" it rotates, i know this since i climb, travers is to go across(bouldering)
non-travers is to go up.


Travers?

I'm assuming you meant traverse.


yer ops i hate that part of english.
"some people are like slinkies there really good for nothing, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs"
"Triangalism! What's the fuckin' point!"
Spoiler: show
I am the muffinman
User avatar
tahthing
Mega Blok
 
Posts: 1306
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:02 pm
Location: Supprised this account isn't


Return to The Armoury

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests