So my players want a tank...

[IAmAGoat95]

I'm a new GM to Rifts and Palladium in general and I'm not quite sure if I should cater to a particular PC's request. To make a long story short one of my players is a big fan of Tank Girl and would like to recreate the character as a Headhunter with a tank. At first my munchkin meter went off, but the more I think about it a tank isn't really any more dangerous than a hatchling dragon or a suit of power armor, especially when you factor in how lacking in mobility tanks generally are. Anyway, I'm basically just looking for some advice, a tank ain't too powerful, right? I'm prepared to blow the damn thing up and then give her a new one every other adventure in one way or another.

[Mechghost]

Just remember tanks take a crew of people to run unless you let the tank be a NPC/AI. But hey I would let a player take one if they wanted one. I have run an intro game where the team was given an APC/tank as the team vehicle and it worked out fine.

[glitterboy2098]

tanks in rifts range from weak to powerful.

if your worried about munchkinism.. i'd suggest looking at the M-48 refit by golden age weaponsmiths (it's in the original Mercenaries book)

it's armor and firepower is comparable to a Mountaineer ATV.. the players will have to be very careful in picking their fights and their use of tactics, because it can't just wade into a fight. however, unlike a Mountaineer ATV, it is an actual tank. an SDC one with some MDC plating bolted on, but a tank.
they'll need the rest of the party to help crew it (minimum crew of 3.. driver, gunner, loader. 4 in military service [commander]), and it runs on diesel so you'll need to pick up fuel every so often.

[Mlp7029]

tanks in rifts range from weak to powerful.

if your worried about munchkinism.. i'd suggest looking at the M-48 refit by golden age weaponsmiths (it's in the original Mercenaries book)

it's armor and firepower is comparable to a Mountaineer ATV.. the players will have to be very careful in picking their fights and their use of tactics, because it can't just wade into a fight. however, unlike a Mountaineer ATV, it is an actual tank. an SDC one with some MDC plating bolted on, but a tank.
they'll need the rest of the party to help crew it (minimum crew of 3.. driver, gunner, loader. 4 in military service [commander]), and it runs on diesel so you'll need to pick up fuel every so often.

I think the real question is how do the other players feel about the tank idea? The party better have an Operator to keep said tank running. A Mountaineer customized by an Operator might be a good fit. Most tank guns don't seem to live up to their size when compared to rail guns. A Shemarrian rail gun would make a great main gun for a Mountaineer or a quad mount with 2 JA-12s & 2 rail guns.

[glitterboy2098]

actually the Iron heart tanks are really good.. their guns match up to what people perceive as tank power (as with everything.. MDC skews the estimates), their armor is darn good, and they even have nuclear power. an Ironhammer tank is easily a match for a glitterboy, and the Ironfist light tank a match for most piloted robots.

the GAW tank is a real tank.. it's low power is due to the fact it's using realworld tech (aka, SDC tech), with just some mdc upgrades. (basically MDC explosive shells for the 90mm cannon and add on mdc plating.)

[everloss]

That sounds pretty cool
If I remember correctly, the tank in Tank Girl was kind of like a dog, in that it followed simple commands, came when she whistled, etc.

You could easily say the tank has a simple artificial intelligence enabling it to follow some orders, but it can't really think or act on its own.

It's basically a really big and limited power armor.

[guardiandashi]

That sounds pretty cool
If I remember correctly, the tank in Tank Girl was kind of like a dog, in that it followed simple commands, came when she whistled, etc.

You could easily say the tank has a simple artificial intelligence enabling it to follow some orders, but it can't really think or act on its own.

It's basically a really big and limited power armor.

you have a lot of options.
there are tank tanks as was mentioned.
there was the neo-abrams in one of the books that was downright evil
there are the Nauroni tanks like the juggernaught
you can also pull in things like the VHT from robotech (southern cross) at least for a concept

you can also heavily automate the tank if you want or if you want to be REALLY munchkin give the player (or have them run into if you want to KILL them) bun bun, or a BOLO.

the point is that tanks can range in power from a heavy plasma ejector can one shot a modern (sdc) tank, all the way up to it can dominate a continent, and potshot starships out of orbit.

[Alrik Vas]

go with something like the iron maiden apc from rifts mercenaries. not spotter buff, but with troop carrying and mini missile launchers it can still fit the bill.

[Athos]

I'm a new GM to Rifts and Palladium in general and I'm not quite sure if I should cater to a particular PC's request. To make a long story short one of my players is a big fan of Tank Girl and would like to recreate the character as a Headhunter with a tank. At first my munchkin meter went off, but the more I think about it a tank isn't really any more dangerous than a hatchling dragon or a suit of power armor, especially when you factor in how lacking in mobility tanks generally are. Anyway, I'm basically just looking for some advice, a tank ain't too powerful, right? I'm prepared to blow the damn thing up and then give her a new one every other adventure in one way or another.

A tank is just a vehicle for the most part. Try an Iron Heart tank, maybe even one converted over to run on PPE by a TW, unless you want them to have to find gas all the time. Compared to a GB, one of these tanks is nothing, an iron heart Iron Hammer MBT, only has a rate of fire of 2 per melee on its main gun. It will keep the group's operator full time busy trying to repair the tank, since it will likely always be the main target. And... if you end up just hating it, which I doubt, you can always have it throw a tread or something and say replacement parts can't be found. Kind of a weak ending, but I think you will get along with a tank in the party fine.

[kaid]

I'm a new GM to Rifts and Palladium in general and I'm not quite sure if I should cater to a particular PC's request. To make a long story short one of my players is a big fan of Tank Girl and would like to recreate the character as a Headhunter with a tank. At first my munchkin meter went off, but the more I think about it a tank isn't really any more dangerous than a hatchling dragon or a suit of power armor, especially when you factor in how lacking in mobility tanks generally are. Anyway, I'm basically just looking for some advice, a tank ain't too powerful, right? I'm prepared to blow the damn thing up and then give her a new one every other adventure in one way or another.

Honestly a tank is not that bad. Given there are character that start with power armor/robot vehicles a tank will typically be non nuclear powered so range somewhat limited and have a harder time moving through a lot of terrain types at any kinds of speed. Also given they have little defense vs super natural critters in hand to hand combat I don't see any real big problem with letting them have a tank. I know it sounds super munchkin but tanks other than a couple odd ball ones tend to be little if any more powerful than a lot of the other stuff roaming around.

Edit

Forgot to mention if they are open to a tank like vehicle there are some REALLY nice armored support carriers in NG2 that make for great party busses so you get the dual feel of running a tank with some actually good party utility to help the party want to pitch in to keep it in good working order.

Edit edit

The best books to look for tanks is rifts Mercenaries and NG2. There are some others in other books but those are the two best locations for a lot of that sort of thing from tanks to tank like APC available.

[Mr. Jays]

.. i'd suggest looking at the M-48 refit by golden age weaponsmiths (it's in the original Mercenaries book)

Do this

[Shadow Wyrm]

Go ahead and give them a tank, but don't make it easy on them. Expensive armor repair, finding fuel, ammo costs, and don't forget jobs. They will need to earn money to pay for it all. A tank is only munchkin if you do everything for them. Make life hard on them.

[taalismn]

I wouldn't be concerned with munchkinism..Provided it's not a BOLO or a Kreeghor Death Machine, there are plenty of ways to balance a tank, from hard to get ammunition for that main projectile cannon, to sinkholes and mountainous terrain. And the more heavily armored a component, like armored tracks or a cast turret, the harder it gets to replace/repair those parts if a tread gets thrown, or a turret partially melted and jammed in its works. There's also the NOISE a tank makes, which can make getting around unnoticed rather hard. And villages that won't allow such an obvious warmachine inside their walls at night.
That having been said, there are plenty of fun things you can do with a tank. Even a partially damaged and discount stock model like the Iron Maiden or a CS Mark V APC can be fixed up to a variety of configurations, depending on your adventuring style and available resources.
As I recall, there was a two-part Rifter article that allowed you to build custom vehicles, including AFVs, too.


(and yet I find myself thinking of the cat spirit-possessed tank in Those Who Hunt Elves).

[Rayneth]

In my opinion, vehicles are inferior to robots and power armor, as they demand a greater number of crew with reduced terrain navigation ability for no inherent gain (such as penalties to hit it for a smaller profile, or more armor per square inch due to their more compact nature). With that said, there are a few I can recommend. The various Iron heart tanks are some of the finest earth made tanks, possessing excellent direct and indirect firepower and respectable armor plating right out of the factory. For the mercenary on a budget, you can't really go wrong with purchasing a GAW retrofitted Abrahms which comes at a steal at only 200 thousand credits!

For the innovative mercenary, there is always the option of fashioning your own death machine from one of the many vehicles offered around the world. I am a huge fan of designing my own equipment, as I tend to play operators and psi-techs a lot, so this is the route I typically take.

[Daniel Stoker]

Considering they could just play a glitter boy? Yeah, I don’t think playing a headhunter with a tank is going to be that much of an issue. Much like the Glitterboy they’re going to have to get out of it at some point, I doubt many towns will let them in with it and as you pointed out it’s going to have more issues with terrain. Unless everyone else is a vagabond in patchwork armor ala Rifts Australia it shouldn’t be a problem at all.


Daniel Stoker

[glitterboy2098]

where do people get the idea that a tank has a lot of issues with terrain?

they were invented to deal with the mud covered, crater filled no-mans lands and wide trenches of ww1, and in ww2 gained reliability in crossing a wide variety to terrains at speed.

they have lower ground pressure than a human being does! which means that they can cross soft terrain like mud, dirt, and sand without bogging down. (the only time they have trouble is if the soft ground is greater than 1 meter deep)
they can self bridge (as in, just drive right over) any stream, crevasse, or trench that is 3 meters or less wide.
they can push down any tree up to 6 inches wide with little reduction in speed.. which means they can crash right through most light woods relatively unhindered. (and in old growth forests the gaps between tree's are usually big enough to allow the vehicles to pass through without having to knock over tree's)
they can travel up inclines of up to 40 degrees without hindrance, and closer to 60 degrees if the distance is short enough. they can literally drive over any obstacle that is 1 meter or less, even if it is a wall. and unless the wall is very thick, they usually can just drive right through it with little reduction in speed.

and in rifts, with nuclear and electric power, even rivers and lake's won't hinder them.. they can literally drive along the bottom for as long as their life support lasts. with an ICE engine they'd be like today.. able to ford rivers of up to half their height deep, or more if fitted with a fairly simple snorkle system.

don't believe me? read the US army manual on countering tank mobility: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... 02/Ch2.htm]

tanks are literally the original go everywhere vehicles. they were designed to be that way., and that is the main reason the tracked mobility system is still around despite being more maintenance intensive, a bit more expensive, and a bit slower than wheeled systems.

the main reasons that militaries are wary of using tanks in forests and the like isn't mobility.. it's tactical. in a forest, urban area, mountainous ara, etc it is easier for enemy infantry with anti-tank weaponry to get close and hit a tank in a weaker spot, because the terrain provides lots of visual concealment.
they tend to avoid swamps because there are places where the mud/water is too deep to cross with a tank, and that restricts their path of movement.. which also means that it is easier for the vehicles to be caught in ambush and for an advance to halt due to destroyed vehicles blocking the way.

(also, in regards to speed.. most tanks in real life can hit up to double their listed speeds (both cross country and the road speed, the latter of which is usually 50% to 60% higher than the cross country speed) but are mechanically limited by governing devices in the transmission to prevent such travel.. because at those higher speeds they are more likely to throw a track (where the tread part separates from the wheel parts) resulting in temporary severe reduction of mobility and the need for the crew to expose themselves to possible enemy fire as they reseat the track into place.. these governing devices can be disabled fairly easily, but few crews do it in real life because not only do they get in trouble for breaking regulations, but in combat it carries a higher risk..)

[wyrmraker]

In my opinion, vehicles are inferior to robots and power armor, as they demand a greater number of crew with reduced terrain navigation ability for no inherent gain (such as penalties to hit it for a smaller profile, or more armor per square inch due to their more compact nature). With that said, there are a few I can recommend. The various Iron heart tanks are some of the finest earth made tanks, possessing excellent direct and indirect firepower and respectable armor plating right out of the factory. For the mercenary on a budget, you can't really go wrong with purchasing a GAW retrofitted Abrahms which comes at a steal at only 200 thousand credits!

For the innovative mercenary, there is always the option of fashioning your own death machine from one of the many vehicles offered around the world. I am a huge fan of designing my own equipment, as I tend to play operators and psi-techs a lot, so this is the route I typically take.

As a side note, I do disagree with vehicles being inferior to robots and powered armors. Sure, they need a crew, but each crew member can have their own Rate of Fire with a turret weapon; something that powered armors don't have. In addition, I believe that tanks are sorely under-represented in Rifts, and are largely given the short end of the stick in both armor and damage-dealing (I still say a 120mm APFDS round should do a lot more damage than a Boom Gun round). Given the setting, Robots and Powered Armors are given far more attention in Rifts than their predecessors.

[taalismn]

because at those higher speeds they are more likely to throw a track (where the tread part separates from the wheel parts) resulting in temporary severe reduction of mobility and the need for the crew to expose themselves to possible enemy fire as they reseat the track into place.. these governing devices can be disabled fairly easily, but few crews do it in real life because not only do they get in trouble for breaking regulations, but in combat it carries a higher risk..)

Unless you're a BOLO; they regularly blow their tracks and proceed on at the enemy on their wheels, because that's the equivalent of an infantryman crawling on his hands and knees up to strangle you...

[Killer Cyborg]

"Mobility" means one thing today, and another thing in a world with flying robots.

[glitterboy2098]

that's because they're built with what is basically an advanced form of the original christie suspension with convertible drive.. basically every roadwheel was also a drive wheel, and if it lost a track it could drive on anyway as a wheeled vehicle. the russians adopted it early on, but dropped the convertable drive aspect when making the T-34.

a christie suspension allows for very fast travel.. but it's more maintenance intensive due to the extra parts.

most modern tanks use Torsion bar suspensions, which were first commonly used by the germans in WW2. they require lower travel speeds, but are more robust.

of course, bolo's also have 4 to 8 tracks depending on the model, so they can spread their warship sized mass over enough ground to still have a low ground pressure.

[Rayneth]

In my opinion, vehicles are inferior to robots and power armor, as they demand a greater number of crew with reduced terrain navigation ability for no inherent gain (such as penalties to hit it for a smaller profile, or more armor per square inch due to their more compact nature). With that said, there are a few I can recommend. The various Iron heart tanks are some of the finest earth made tanks, possessing excellent direct and indirect firepower and respectable armor plating right out of the factory. For the mercenary on a budget, you can't really go wrong with purchasing a GAW retrofitted Abrahms which comes at a steal at only 200 thousand credits!

For the innovative mercenary, there is always the option of fashioning your own death machine from one of the many vehicles offered around the world. I am a huge fan of designing my own equipment, as I tend to play operators and psi-techs a lot, so this is the route I typically take.

As a side note, I do disagree with vehicles being inferior to robots and powered armors. Sure, they need a crew, but each crew member can have their own Rate of Fire with a turret weapon; something that powered armors don't have. In addition, I believe that tanks are sorely under-represented in Rifts, and are largely given the short end of the stick in both armor and damage-dealing (I still say a 120mm APFDS round should do a lot more damage than a Boom Gun round). Given the setting, Robots and Powered Armors are given far more attention in Rifts than their predecessors.

That is true, but you are dedicating 4-5 men to a single vehicle, these 4-5 men could instead be wearing power armor with their own pool of actions. They are also not tied to a single main body M.D.C. and are far more able to do things like take cover and enter buildings.

I do agree, the Boom gun's place as the most powerful common weapon in Rifts isn't something I particularly like. The weapon's fletchettes aren't exactly very heavy, especially compared to a 120mm armor piercing shell, capable of travelling at comparable speeds. 4d6x10 or 5d6x10 would be better I believe.

[taalismn]

That is true, but you are dedicating 4-5 men to a single vehicle, these 4-5 men could instead be wearing power armor with their own pool of actions. They are also not tied to a single main body M.D.C. and are far more able to do things like take cover and enter buildings.

.

Both the Russians and the British tried experiments with multi-turret tanks, on the idea you could copy the configuration of naval vessels on a smaller scale. These tanks carried 2-4 secondary turrets, but the concept failed miserably because of a) the various turrets fouling each others' arcs of fire, and b) lack of coordination between the various turret crews.
The technology of the time also meant that the added mass of the extra turrets just to add a few more machine guns or light caliber cannon meant more complexity at the expense of less well-placed armor and a weaker main gun.
Now you MIGHT be able to get around that in Rifts using remote control turrets run from a central crew compartment, or have everybody cyberjacked into a tank-over LAN system(sort of a cyber-gestalt with a shared VR 'overall view') with the crews becoming fairly close as a result..but not everybody's into borderline transhuman mind gestalts. However, it could be incorporated into a particularly strange tech-enclave's signature technology or d-bee design.

[guardiandashi]

That is true, but you are dedicating 4-5 men to a single vehicle, these 4-5 men could instead be wearing power armor with their own pool of actions. They are also not tied to a single main body M.D.C. and are far more able to do things like take cover and enter buildings.

.

Both the Russians and the British tried experiments with multi-turret tanks, on the idea you could copy the configuration of naval vessels on a smaller scale. These tanks carried 2-4 secondary turrets, but the concept failed miserably because of a) the various turrets fouling each others' arcs of fire, and b) lack of coordination between the various turret crews.
The technology of the time also meant that the added mass of the extra turrets just to add a few more machine guns or light caliber cannon meant more complexity at the expense of less well-placed armor and a weaker main gun.
Now you MIGHT be able to get around that in Rifts using remote control turrets run from a central crew compartment, or have everybody cyberjacked into a tank-over LAN system(sort of a cyber-gestalt with a shared VR 'overall view') with the crews becoming fairly close as a result..but not everybody's into borderline transhuman mind gestalts. However, it could be incorporated into a particularly strange tech-enclave's signature technology or d-bee design.

there are times when additional weapons emplacements on a tank might make sense, but with modern technology I don't believe it is usually worth it.

with that said in rifts I can it might make sense to a point, but it would usually be in "big" armor not in small units.

most of the modern examples I can think of offhand it really comes down to 1 primary gun (typically 100mm+ ) 1 (or more)coaxal lighter guns (usually machine guns for targets that aren't worth a main gun round) 1 or more anti-personnel weapons such as the top mounted machine gun, and occasionally hull mounted ones in addition) and then often "strap on" special case things mounted to the turret, like missiles, smoke, flare, and other dispensers, sometimes reactive or spaced armor, occasionally things like claymores (the mines not the swords) etc. but realize in most cases that addon stuff was added well after the design phase as "upgrades" or improvised counters to conditions not envisioned by the designers.

[RiftJunkie]

Nobody mentioned that "Wrath of God Destroyer" tank thingy out of Naruni Wave 2? There's a 1 person tank.

As to the OP: It's Rifts: if the PC's are tough, give them tougher/more bad guys to deal with. Availability/cost of repairs/ammo/fuel... whatever it is doesn't have to be easy/cheap.

The GM giveth, the GM taketh away.......

[taalismn]

Nobody mentioned that "Wrath of God Destroyer" tank thingy out of Naruni Wave 2? There's a 1 person tank.


The GM giveth, the GM taketh away.......

One really really INSANE person...Power corrupts, absolute power is FUN.

Back in the old Mechanoid Trilogy, too, there's some nifty AFVs that could do with a make-over. Colonial plasma tanks. armed trucks, Borellian heavy hovertanks(basically a starship turret on anti-gravs) and the Balrog Destroyer, a city-block-sized robot hovertank/land warship.

[random_username]

MDC Tech: Armor, Power Armor, Robot Vehicles, Military Vehicles, etc.
- without sufficient damage buffers tends to play out like Grand Theft Auto: using for as long as possible but ultimately ends up being frequently destroyed requiring the 'acquisition' of the next available MDC tech
- damage buffers: autododge, force fields, impervious to energy, stealth, etc.
- acquisition of whatever is available may not precisely mesh with the player's skills which can be problematic. Certain special abilities can get around that to a certain degree (Psi-Tech, Mechano-Link Major Super Ability:D4-Skryapers, High level + Telemechanics + Huge amounts of ISP, all relevant piloting skills, etc). Power Armor Elite and Robot Combat Elite can be particularly problematic due to effectively over specialization / lack of access to replacements.

Combat or Non-Combat Vehicles:
- combat vehicles tend to require damage buffers
- non-combat vehicles (can still have huge MDC) are generally regarded as prizes/loot by intelligent attackers so long as they otherwise remain neutral in overall combat. Meaning if all the players exit the non-combat vehicle to engage the opponents via other means the attackers will attempt to eliminate the PCs and/or steal the vehicle instead of destroying it. Having an AI robot/equivalent pilot the non-combat vehicle can cut down on the vulnerability to theft.
- even when dealing with animal/monstrous attackers non-combat vehicles can usually be removed as targets by distracting them with offensive attacks from PCs outside (even if recently exited the vehicle). Since things causing them pain/problems are going to be more relevant than the simply inoffensive non-combat vehicle.

[wyrmraker]

That is true, but you are dedicating 4-5 men to a single vehicle, these 4-5 men could instead be wearing power armor with their own pool of actions. They are also not tied to a single main body M.D.C. and are far more able to do things like take cover and enter buildings.

.

Both the Russians and the British tried experiments with multi-turret tanks, on the idea you could copy the configuration of naval vessels on a smaller scale. These tanks carried 2-4 secondary turrets, but the concept failed miserably because of a) the various turrets fouling each others' arcs of fire, and b) lack of coordination between the various turret crews.
The technology of the time also meant that the added mass of the extra turrets just to add a few more machine guns or light caliber cannon meant more complexity at the expense of less well-placed armor and a weaker main gun.
Now you MIGHT be able to get around that in Rifts using remote control turrets run from a central crew compartment, or have everybody cyberjacked into a tank-over LAN system(sort of a cyber-gestalt with a shared VR 'overall view') with the crews becoming fairly close as a result..but not everybody's into borderline transhuman mind gestalts. However, it could be incorporated into a particularly strange tech-enclave's signature technology or d-bee design.

there are times when additional weapons emplacements on a tank might make sense, but with modern technology I don't believe it is usually worth it.

with that said in rifts I can it might make sense to a point, but it would usually be in "big" armor not in small units.

most of the modern examples I can think of offhand it really comes down to 1 primary gun (typically 100mm+ ) 1 (or more)coaxal lighter guns (usually machine guns for targets that aren't worth a main gun round) 1 or more anti-personnel weapons such as the top mounted machine gun, and occasionally hull mounted ones in addition) and then often "strap on" special case things mounted to the turret, like missiles, smoke, flare, and other dispensers, sometimes reactive or spaced armor, occasionally things like claymores (the mines not the swords) etc. but realize in most cases that addon stuff was added well after the design phase as "upgrades" or improvised counters to conditions not envisioned by the designers.

Given the advents of technology in Rifts, as shown by robots with crews with their own assigned weapons systems (I'm looking at the Devastator as a prime example of this), I believe that, in Rifts at least, this issue would become much less of a problem than it has been in the 20th century.

One guy piloting the vehicle (there's 4-5 dodges), and 3 more people, each on a turret for an estimated 12-15 attacks. Isn't that what large robots are about, and what can make them so dangerous? The same should hold true for tanks in Rifts.

[kaid]

One of the main things that prevents tanks from being OP baring some wacky ones like the world destroyer is in the rifts world the most common bane to tanks have increased in strength far more than tanks have. The bane of all tanks is infantry or things able to get up close and inside the weapon range where short of getting out of the tank there is not much a tank can do to them.

In rifts your infantry can potentially be magic users who can teleport/run at super speed/be nearly impossible to see so even in flat ground may not be able to engage at any range. Now add in supernatural strength melee attacks or power armor MDC melee attacks and you have a tankers nightmare. Stuff strong enough to close range on you even if you do see them and once they are on top of you there is almost nothing you can do to keep them from destroying your tank. This is mitigated when deployed in a squad of tanks but a single tank by itself has some serious tactical limitations.

[Blue_Lion]

Wait it almost sound like people are fine if the player has a suit of PA that is crewed by one but make it expensive and annoying to have a vehicle that to fight at peak levels. A tank is not a one player unit like a PA a crew served vehicle that is likely to be manned by a large part of the party. Can they be powerfull shure but at the cost of 3-4 suits of PA. also people seem to think that a tank is helpless just because some super natural creature is punching it. sure they may not be able to use the main gun at point blank range but they typicaly have weapons like rail guns that shoot targets that are in close. In addition tanks can and do handle lots of terrain at speeds faster than many super natural creatures can walk. So you do not need to assume that it will be screwed if super natural shows up.

Also NG sales a hover tank, so a tank does not need to be tracked. As I understand it tracks are used because they can go places and handle more load than wheeled vehicles. Tanks can be either using traditional fuels, magical or even nuclear power plants.)

In theory you could make a 1 man tank with simple AI you can look in source book 1 for cost. But I would place mdc and damage at about the levels of a heavy PA or light robot.

[wyrmraker]

One of the main things that prevents tanks from being OP baring some wacky ones like the world destroyer is in the rifts world the most common bane to tanks have increased in strength far more than tanks have. The bane of all tanks is infantry or things able to get up close and inside the weapon range where short of getting out of the tank there is not much a tank can do to them.

In rifts your infantry can potentially be magic users who can teleport/run at super speed/be nearly impossible to see so even in flat ground may not be able to engage at any range. Now add in supernatural strength melee attacks or power armor MDC melee attacks and you have a tankers nightmare. Stuff strong enough to close range on you even if you do see them and once they are on top of you there is almost nothing you can do to keep them from destroying your tank. This is mitigated when deployed in a squad of tanks but a single tank by itself has some serious tactical limitations.

All that you say is true, but not merely for tanks. Any ground-based armor system has that limitation. Powered armors, robots, cyborgs, all of them have their tactical limitations. And to be honest, their only limitations are in their application. If someone uses their gear foolishly, they'll usually end up without it in short order. If they use it wisely, they should be able to keep ahold of it long enough to be able to upgrade it as well as live to fight another day.

[taalismn]

Also NG sales a hover tank, so a tank does not need to be tracked. As I understand it tracks are used because they can go places and handle more load than wheeled vehicles. Tanks can be either using traditional fuels, magical or even nuclear power plants.)

In theory you could make a 1 man tank with simple AI you can look in source book 1 for cost. But I would place mdc and damage at about the levels of a heavy PA or light robot.

At this point we move beyond the 'tank' being defined as a track-laying vehicle with a main gun/turret, or braces of smaller weapons and into what are more technically termed AFVs(Armored Fighting Vehicles).
Exact capabilities vary on how much in the way of money and resources you're willing to put into the AFV(or the GM allows). You can easily have a tank that's more expensive than a giant robot, but the general attitude with the Iron Heart MBTs seems to have been to create a less expensive, more easily piloted and maintained, combat unit that could use conventional fuels in place of expensive nuke powerplants. Tanks tend also to have fewer vulnerable moving parts than giant robots, so simplicity, rather than complexity, is also a factor to look for in a successful tank design.

[kaid]

One of the main things that prevents tanks from being OP baring some wacky ones like the world destroyer is in the rifts world the most common bane to tanks have increased in strength far more than tanks have. The bane of all tanks is infantry or things able to get up close and inside the weapon range where short of getting out of the tank there is not much a tank can do to them.

In rifts your infantry can potentially be magic users who can teleport/run at super speed/be nearly impossible to see so even in flat ground may not be able to engage at any range. Now add in supernatural strength melee attacks or power armor MDC melee attacks and you have a tankers nightmare. Stuff strong enough to close range on you even if you do see them and once they are on top of you there is almost nothing you can do to keep them from destroying your tank. This is mitigated when deployed in a squad of tanks but a single tank by itself has some serious tactical limitations.

All that you say is true, but not merely for tanks. Any ground-based armor system has that limitation. Powered armors, robots, cyborgs, all of them have their tactical limitations. And to be honest, their only limitations are in their application. If someone uses their gear foolishly, they'll usually end up without it in short order. If they use it wisely, they should be able to keep ahold of it long enough to be able to upgrade it as well as live to fight another day.

The advantage of power armor/robot vehicles is because most of them have arms and legs it is far more difficult to close distance with one and then simply latch on and be unhittable. Not impossible but far harder than tanks. Power armor is probably the least vulnerable to those tactics simply due to their size means fewer dead spots or areas were somebody could latch on and strike it with impunity. Robot vehicles have more blind spots but if you are latched onto the back of a robot vehicle they have the chance to simply roll over you and stand back up. A tank if you have somebody latched onto you are likely screwed. It is typically impossible to bring the main cannon to bear on something that close and for many the secondary weapon systems may require you to open a hatch to utilize which is SERIOUSLY dangerous as now the armor is effectively breached and the vulnerable crew is open to attack.

Tanks though tend to be FAR cheaper than robot vehicles even if you get a nice hover tank and the gas powered ones are often power armor or less in price which gives you a pretty serious offensive punch and decent defenses for the cost. The fact that they can hold extra people is not a huge issue often in a party you will have a number of folks who won't start with vehicles so it can be a nice party vehicle and gives people like rogue scholars/medics/operators some fire power to play with in situations where heavy combat is required.

[Blue_Lion]

One of the main things that prevents tanks from being OP baring some wacky ones like the world destroyer is in the rifts world the most common bane to tanks have increased in strength far more than tanks have. The bane of all tanks is infantry or things able to get up close and inside the weapon range where short of getting out of the tank there is not much a tank can do to them.

In rifts your infantry can potentially be magic users who can teleport/run at super speed/be nearly impossible to see so even in flat ground may not be able to engage at any range. Now add in supernatural strength melee attacks or power armor MDC melee attacks and you have a tankers nightmare. Stuff strong enough to close range on you even if you do see them and once they are on top of you there is almost nothing you can do to keep them from destroying your tank. This is mitigated when deployed in a squad of tanks but a single tank by itself has some serious tactical limitations.

All that you say is true, but not merely for tanks. Any ground-based armor system has that limitation. Powered armors, robots, cyborgs, all of them have their tactical limitations. And to be honest, their only limitations are in their application. If someone uses their gear foolishly, they'll usually end up without it in short order. If they use it wisely, they should be able to keep ahold of it long enough to be able to upgrade it as well as live to fight another day.

The advantage of power armor/robot vehicles is because most of them have arms and legs it is far more difficult to close distance with one and then simply latch on and be unhittable. Not impossible but far harder than tanks. Power armor is probably the least vulnerable to those tactics simply due to their size means fewer dead spots or areas were somebody could latch on and strike it with impunity. Robot vehicles have more blind spots but if you are latched onto the back of a robot vehicle they have the chance to simply roll over you and stand back up. A tank if you have somebody latched onto you are likely screwed. It is typically impossible to bring the main cannon to bear on something that close and for many the secondary weapon systems may require you to open a hatch to utilize which is SERIOUSLY dangerous as now the armor is effectively breached and the vulnerable crew is open to attack.

Tanks though tend to be FAR cheaper than robot vehicles even if you get a nice hover tank and the gas powered ones are often power armor or less in price which gives you a pretty serious offensive punch and decent defenses for the cost. The fact that they can hold extra people is not a huge issue often in a party you will have a number of folks who won't start with vehicles so it can be a nice party vehicle and gives people like rogue scholars/medics/operators some fire power to play with in situations where heavy combat is required.

It can be fairy hard to latch onto a tank and still do damage to it and not be able to be hit by one of its weapons. There is a matter of speed of the tank can keep its distance from most foes that would try such tatics. just climbing on the tank does not give you a free ride to smash it. The driver can take actions to throw you off. The coaxal gun can shoot foes on the main body and the top gun shoot any one on the turret. The only way to avoid that would be to hug the side of the turret and hang on for dear life limiting your ability to inflict damage. And then the can always open a hatch and shoot you. (Note that if the tank has reactive armor or shaped charges on the side to blast you off when you climb on it is mute point.)

True fully I do not know of any one that has ever successfully swarmed a modern main battle tank to destroy it in real life. To a supernatural creature that has good MD strikes the weak hand to hand damage of PA is fairly non threating. Shure it can fight in hand to hand but at a very limited capacity. Its main damage is ranged weapons. If most PA is fighting at hand to hand with any siginificcant supernatural threat the PA has lost.

[kaid]

Reports of some recent losses of Abrams

Only one sequence of images posted on a pro-Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) Twitter account on 6 June appears to show an Abrams actually being destroyed. A militant is seen placing a charge on the tank and an object is also thrown into an open turret hatch. Flames are then seen coming out of the hatches. The fate of the crew is unclear.

Another sequence posted on 28 May purportedly shows the same militant placing a charge on or in the turret of another Abrams in a hull-down position. While the extent of the damage caused by the resulting explosion is unclear, the fact that militants are repeatedly getting close to the tanks suggests the vehicles lack adequate infantry support.

Tanks need good levels of infantry support to survive especially in urban environments. Out on open areas is where tanks do best if they get in forests/cities where people can get close to them even the best tanks around can get taken out by relatively basic attacks. Those were examples of just armor damaged tanks many examples of ones simply damaged where infantry got up close in urban fighting to place explosives to blow the treads to immobilize the tanks.

[Shark_Force]

True fully I do not know of any one that has ever successfully swarmed a modern main battle tank to destroy it in real life. To a supernatural creature that has good MD strikes the weak hand to hand damage of PA is fairly non threating. Shure it can fight in hand to hand but at a very limited capacity. Its main damage is ranged weapons. If most PA is fighting at hand to hand with any siginificcant supernatural threat the PA has lost.

it's not the melee damage of the PA/'bot that's important. it's the ability to parry, and to use their limbs to reach the enemy with their main weapons much more easily (or at least to remove enemies which are clinging to areas that the main weapons can't reach, so that the main weapons can then reach them).

[Dog_O_War]

I'm a new GM to Rifts and Palladium in general and I'm not quite sure if I should cater to a particular PC's request. To make a long story short one of my players is a big fan of Tank Girl and would like to recreate the character as a Headhunter with a tank. At first my munchkin meter went off, but the more I think about it a tank isn't really any more dangerous than a hatchling dragon or a suit of power armor, especially when you factor in how lacking in mobility tanks generally are. Anyway, I'm basically just looking for some advice, a tank ain't too powerful, right? I'm prepared to blow the damn thing up and then give her a new one every other adventure in one way or another.

Did you end up allowing them to get a tank?

If so, which one did you go with?

[kaid]

Hehe tangents aside give them a tank! The worst that can happen is it winds up being a bit strong and god knows battle attrition will whittle it down to size fast enough if that is a problem.

[torjones]

I'm a new GM to Rifts and Palladium in general and I'm not quite sure if I should cater to a particular PC's request. To make a long story short one of my players is a big fan of Tank Girl and would like to recreate the character as a Headhunter with a tank. At first my munchkin meter went off, but the more I think about it a tank isn't really any more dangerous than a hatchling dragon or a suit of power armor, especially when you factor in how lacking in mobility tanks generally are. Anyway, I'm basically just looking for some advice, a tank ain't too powerful, right? I'm prepared to blow the damn thing up and then give her a new one every other adventure in one way or another.

I'd say, go with it. Sounds like a good bit of fun. Start her out with something simple, like the Carnivore Mk I Light Hover Tank. It does boomgun damage at less than half the boomgun's range, and only has 400 MDC main body. I would definitely allow many modifications to such a vehicle (especially Naruni energy shields) or TW enhancements if there's a TW in the group, and other mods to give it that Tank Girl feel. (personally I'd also let her get a robot pilot for the thing, so she can be the gunner and have a bit more fun with it. My recommendation would be the Triax DV-12 Dyna-bot.) The Carnivore is in Mercenaries, P 130-131. The Triax DV-12 Dyna-Bot Labor Drone is in Rifts Sourcebook 1 Revised, p 46-48.

[Raze_7]

Well, as a tank-lover myself, I'd give it to them. Tanks are by no means overpowered (unless you're in an MDC version of one of the Land-Dreadnaughts from the Leviathan series), as technology is no longer the only opposition to technology. Remember, there are Psionics and Magics, too.

Also, as a side-note, I really want to see an MDC tank with a lighter version of the Tundra-Ranger gun (the TR-500 or something, basically a rapid-fire death ray) mounted on it, with decreased damage and mobility. (And, yes, if you're asking, I think that this would be one of the few "overpowered" tanks, except for the fact that it is hard to produce).

[Raze_7]

Actually, it depends. Do you have a Glitterboy in your campaign? I think that you should be willing to give the characters with the tank (unless it's a single-person tank) a stronger tank than a GB, however, they have to work as a team to use it (unlike the GB, where you don't have more than one crew member.) I would say the same if someone wanted a giant robot.