Post by batonmaster500 on Dec 23, 2017 4:55:08 GMT
Alright, a few things for the FAC:
First off, a spinning ballista, this is the thing from the battle of the five armies. Just the ballista from this.
Secondly, a carboat. This is with the turret on the back, not the front, though.
Second to last, 2 different types of amphibious tanks.
Lastly, a tank. All of the vehicles would be colored different shades of brown with an occasional mix of blue and green, orange and black, and black and white, because someone besides a beaver helped to make them.
First off, a spinning ballista, this is the thing from the battle of the five armies. Just the ballista from this.
Secondly, a carboat. This is with the turret on the back, not the front, though.
Second to last, 2 different types of amphibious tanks.
Lastly, a tank. All of the vehicles would be colored different shades of brown with an occasional mix of blue and green, orange and black, and black and white, because someone besides a beaver helped to make them.
First off, a spinning ballista, this is the thing from the battle of the five armies. Just the ballista from this.
Secondly, a carboat. This is with the turret on the back, not the front, though.
Second to last, 2 different types of amphibious tanks.
Lastly, a tank. All of the vehicles would be colored different shades of brown with an occasional mix of blue and green, orange and black, and black and white, because someone besides a beaver helped to make them.
First off, a spinning ballista, this is the thing from the battle of the five armies. Just the ballista from this.
Secondly, a carboat. This is with the turret on the back, not the front, though. Second to last, 2 different types of amphibious tank
Lastly, a tank.
All of the vehicles would be colored different shades of brown with an occasional mix of blue and green, orange and black, and black and white, because someone besides a beaver helped to make them.
Specs? Otherwise they seem good, but I would need to know how powerful they are and chi consumption.
First off, a spinning ballista, this is the thing from the battle of the five armies. Just the ballista from this.
Secondly, a carboat. This is with the turret on the back, not the front, though.
Second to last, 2 different types of amphibious tanks.
Lastly, a tank. All of the vehicles would be colored different shades of brown with an occasional mix of blue and green, orange and black, and black and white, because someone besides a beaver helped to make them.
First off, a spinning ballista, this is the thing from the battle of the five armies. Just the ballista from this.
Secondly, a carboat. This is with the turret on the back, not the front, though.
Second to last, 2 different types of amphibious tanks.
Lastly, a tank. All of the vehicles would be colored different shades of brown with an occasional mix of blue and green, orange and black, and black and white, because someone besides a beaver helped to make them.
Oh, dear. I feel that as a member of the FAC, it is also my duty to warn against what people are submitting.
First and foremost. I need stats. Speed, armour, penetration values of the guns, etc. Without them, I must assume that their capabilities and flaws are equal to their real-life counterparts. Not ideal.
The ballista: Why would you want this? I mean, you could perhaps take down a helicopter with an incompetent pilot, and advancing infantrymen, but then, any person with an automatic rifle could wreck this thing, or perhaps even set it on fire (assuming that it's made from wood). It won't be able to destroy any armoured vehicle by a far margin, unless you start using magnets to fire metal rods. If you really want it, you can have it. Just don't expect it to do anything.
The amphibious car: Eh, I need more info. How fast is it? What is the calibre of the turret, does it have armour?
Amphibious tanks: The first one seems okay. The second one is actually an APC, so you could carry a few people in the back. But again, I need data on them.
And finally the tank. Well, originally this thing didn't even have suspension. Let us suppose you have a modernised version of the model on the image. Slap modern machine guns, cannons, armour, suspension and a better engine. Then it might actually be good. However, I must warn you that you have very vulnerable track, and a blind spot at its direct front, covered only by a machinegun.
First off, a spinning ballista, this is the thing from the battle of the five armies. Just the ballista from this.
Secondly, a carboat. This is with the turret on the back, not the front, though.
Second to last, 2 different types of amphibious tanks.
Lastly, a tank. All of the vehicles would be colored different shades of brown with an occasional mix of blue and green, orange and black, and black and white, because someone besides a beaver helped to make them.
Oh, dear. I feel that as a member of the FAC, it is also my duty to warn against what people are submitting.
First and foremost. I need stats. Speed, armour, penetration values of the guns, etc. Without them, I must assume that their capabilities and flaws are equal to their real-life counterparts. Not ideal.
The ballista: Why would you want this? I mean, you could perhaps take down a helicopter with an incompetent pilot, and advancing infantrymen, but then, any person with an automatic rifle could wreck this thing, or perhaps even set it on fire (assuming that it's made from wood). It won't be able to destroy any armoured vehicle by a far margin, unless you start using magnets to fire metal rods. If you really want it, you can have it. Just don't expect it to do anything.
The amphibious car: Eh, I need more info. How fast is it? What is the calibre of the turret, does it have armour?
Amphibious tanks: The first one seems okay. The second one is actually an APC, so you could carry a few people in the back. But again, I need data on them.
And finally the tank. Well, originally this thing didn't even have suspension. Let us suppose you have a modernised version of the model on the image. Slap modern machine guns, cannons, armour, suspension and a better engine. Then it might actually be good. However, I must warn you that you have very vulnerable track, and a blind spot at its direct front, covered only by a machinegun.
Can’t we just throw Russian tanks at the Bears for them to use? KV-2 will destroy his weak tenks.
-snip- All of the vehicles would be colored different shades of brown with an occasional mix of blue and green, orange and black, and black and white, because someone besides a beaver helped to make them.
Oh, dear. I feel that as a member of the FAC, it is also my duty to warn against what people are submitting.
First and foremost. I need stats. Speed, armour, penetration values of the guns, etc. Without them, I must assume that their capabilities and flaws are equal to their real-life counterparts. Not ideal.
The ballista: Why would you want this? I mean, you could perhaps take down a helicopter with an incompetent pilot, and advancing infantrymen, but then, any person with an automatic rifle could wreck this thing, or perhaps even set it on fire (assuming that it's made from wood). It won't be able to destroy any armoured vehicle by a far margin, unless you start using magnets to fire metal rods. If you really want it, you can have it. Just don't expect it to do anything.
The amphibious car: Eh, I need more info. How fast is it? What is the calibre of the turret, does it have armour?
Amphibious tanks: The first one seems okay. The second one is actually an APC, so you could carry a few people in the back. But again, I need data on them.
And finally the tank. Well, originally this thing didn't even have suspension. Let us suppose you have a modernised version of the model on the image. Slap modern machine guns, cannons, armour, suspension and a better engine. Then it might actually be good. However, I must warn you that you have very vulnerable track, and a blind spot at its direct front, covered only by a machinegun.
OOC: Ok, i'll figure out the stats later when i have time.
I can't put any more attachments on this post. I'll put the picture of the speeder on the next post.
Since I'm hoping to introduce the Vultures in January, I'll submit the Vulture Mech now. I built this MOC myself.
It's smaller and skinnier than an Ice Bear mech, but that makes it faster and more agile. Its legs are lean and spindly so it can run and jump swiftly, but this is also a weakness, as the thighs can be very easily broken apart in battle if not protected enough, leaving the mech immobile. It's the same speed as the canon Ice Vulture Glider, and can fly thanks to the engines in its feet. It takes 3 chi orbs to power it; 2 safe in the compartments on either side of the neck, and 1 behind the neck, but the one back there is vulnerable and easily stolen. Chi consumption rate: 3 orbs every 12 minutes. Its arms are symmetrical on both sides up until the hands. Its right hand is a crushing claw that can snap a bike or speedor in half (not the stone speedor wheel, just the metallic vehicle shell). In place of a left hand, the Vulture Mech has a wing blade that can cut through rock and some kinds of metal if the metal is frozen. The wing blade can also spin around like a propeller and cut things up rapidly during battle, but it is very easy to blast off or rip off. Above the wing blade is a grappling hook shooter. The grappling hook will immediately freeze whatever it hits, but the line can be cut in two by a sword.
Like most Ice Hunter vehicles, this mech has a smaller detachable vehicle: the Vulture Speeder. The speeder has 2 modes of transportation, and it goes as fast as a chi-powered speedor in either mode: it can either hover a half a foot above the ground, or move on the snow like a snowmobile. It has a rocket booster and an ice missile launcher. The latter can be used while the speeder is attached to the mech as well.
