Glitter Boys & "Cat-Like Landing"

[Warshield73]

In the Northern Gun 2 book most of the power armors have stats for a cat-like landing using leg and back thrusters. Has anyone thought about this for power armors in other books? I am really thinking about the Glitter Boy as it has thrusters that allow it to leap about 80 feet.

I was using the Samson as a comparison and I was thinking that since it has a drop height of 400 feet standard with a maximum height with penalties of 800 feet I was thinking that the GB would have a 300 feet / 600 feet stat.

Any thoughts? Anyone come up with a standard conversion to determine this for power armors in other books?

[taalismn]

I'm cool with that, considering how the Glitterboy is supposed to be able to hover briefly on its stabilization jets.

[Alrik Vas]

Yeah, i see no issues with this either so long as they make a proper piloting check.

[Tor]

Do these thrusters emit flame? Could a GB make a cat-like landing onto an oil field?

[taalismn]

Do these thrusters emit flame? Could a GB make a cat-like landing onto an oil field?

I think they're more super air compressors rather than superheaters.

[Warshield73]

Do these thrusters emit flame? Could a GB make a cat-like landing onto an oil field?

I think they're more super air compressors rather than superheaters.

Yeah I have always assumed that land vehicles that have jet assisted leaps that they operate more like a hover jet than an actual jet engine.

[Zer0 Kay]

1. Do all the suits that have it have both foot and back thrusters?

2. Does cat-like mean all four on the floor? (as opposed to just a soft landing)

If yes to both, then no, but that's just a descriptor issue. I'd still allow the GB to make relatively soft landings, otherwise the "leap ability" would be rarely used if every time the GB came crashing to the ground.

If either or both are no, then yes.

[Eashamahel]

Remember the GB can both make jet assisted leaps (nearly quadruple it's regular running leap distance or height) and it's thrusters are capable of holding it hovering stationary a dozen feet in the air for up to a minute, and it is noted to be "very shock resistant" alongside it's high bonus to roll with punch, fall or impact. Of all the non-flying power armours/light robots, it should probably have near the best ability to fall long distances and land effectively.

[Zer0 Kay]

Remember the GB can both make jet assisted leaps (nearly quadruple it's regular running leap distance or height) and it's thrusters are capable of holding it hovering stationary a dozen feet in the air for up to a minute, and it is noted to be "very shock resistant" alongside it's high bonus to roll with punch, fall or impact. Of all the non-flying power armours/light robots, it should probably have near the best ability to fall long distances and land effectively.

A line backer has an excellent roll with impact, but he can't land like a cat.
A Sumo... or other wrestler has excellent shock absorbtion, as would the line backer, and excellent but, no sumo can land with catlike grace. The GB is a power armor, bordering on robot per text it moves like one of the lumbering robots common to Rifts not like a graceful veritech from RT or one of the PA with catlike landing.

Does it land, yup. Is it good, yup. Does it softly touch down upon the earth so as to barely desturb the environment... Probably not.

[Phaze]

A line backer has an excellent roll with impact, but he can't land like a cat.
A Sumo... or other wrestler has excellent shock absorbtion, as would the line backer, and excellent but, no sumo can land with catlike grace.

Yes...but a linebacker or sumo wrestler doesn't have the equivalent of 2 - Pratt & Whitney F100 engines with vectoring thrust strapped to their back. If it can help stabilize the suit from the recoil of the weapon and be able to hover, it should allow some form of gracefull landing, even if it is just a software upgrade.

[kaid]

Given the jet assisted leaps GB can make I would assume it could do the cat like landings some of the NG units can. I would think pretty much any power armor unit with jet assisted jump capability would likely be able to do that maneuver. Your jets may not be strong enough to totally stop your descent but they would allow much more control over your landing point and at least slow you down.

[glitterboy2098]

i would assume that a 'cat like landing' ability is not just a case of having good jets.. but also well programmed computers with macro's intended just for that purpose. i'd imagine that NG just started adding that to its products, and if you want it on non-NG suits you'd need to do a bunch of programming to adapt those macro's to a new suit.. which would include not only making the macro work with the OS, but also adjusting settings and such to meet the specs of the suit.

trying to do it without computer assist would be really tough.

[Zer0 Kay]

Given the jet assisted leaps GB can make I would assume it could do the cat like landings some of the NG units can. I would think pretty much any power armor unit with jet assisted jump capability would likely be able to do that maneuver. Your jets may not be strong enough to totally stop your descent but they would allow much more control over your landing point and at least slow you down.

See the problem here is the vagueness of "cat-like landing". What is your definition? To me it implies grace and silence, maybe with acrobatics during the fall to make sure you land feet first. That part is where the GB can't do it. The GB uses the recoil compensation thrusters and all three slaved to fire in the opposite direction of the BG. So they can't individually pivot to control attitude. They also can't point straight down to soften the landing. The GB wasn't designed to do jet assisted leaps, otherwise the jets would be able to point down and be individually articulated. Could someone modify for this... yup. Why isn't it a common mod, because it is unneeded for a tank to land with catlike grace. And I dare say more intimidating that the dang thing starts a jump, has the jets engage, arcs back down to earth, with a well earned thud, where it suddenly stops seconds before shooting at you. Mommy the monster is chasing me instead of I think some stalker is after me, please, please say he's got free candy.

[Zer0 Kay]

i would assume that a 'cat like landing' ability is not just a case of having good jets.. but also well programmed computers with macro's intended just for that purpose. i'd imagine that NG just started adding that to its products, and if you want it on non-NG suits you'd need to do a bunch of programming to adapt those macro's to a new suit.. which would include not only making the macro work with the OS, but also adjusting settings and such to meet the specs of the suit.

trying to do it without computer assist would be really tough.

Not just that but like I just posted, the thrusters need to be individually controllable.

[kaid]

Well the cat like landing descriptions are all pretty much that they can use the thrusters to break their speed as they fall and aim their landing point even if it exceeds the normal jump range possible to minimize/negate falling damage from certain heights.

For something like the glitterboy that can already do jet assisted leaps and directional control in the air everything needed to accomplish the above already has to exist. Others without the robust jump pack/thruster system of the glitterboys would be potentially a different thing.

[taalismn]

Given that the Glitterboy doesn't have to roll for damage to its legs every time it makes a jet-assisted leap, I'd grandfather it for the 'cat-like landing'...mind you, it will land more like a sabertooth tiger with a full stomach than a housecat, but it will be on its feet.

[Zer0 Kay]

Well the cat like landing descriptions are all pretty much that they can use the thrusters to break their speed as they fall and aim their landing point even if it exceeds the normal jump range possible to minimize/negate falling damage from certain heights.

For something like the glitterboy that can already do jet assisted leaps and directional control in the air everything needed to accomplish the above already has to exist. Others without the robust jump pack/thruster system of the glitterboys would be potentially a different thing.

House rule all you want guys, cannon is that it doesn't do cat-like landings, can only do a jet assisted leap and doesn't take damage from the landing.

There are no jets in their feet so it can't break speed... descent speed, maybe, but foward speed no. You know what they call a Glitterboy that has enough thrust at the end of its jump? One that didn't expend all of its energy and didn't jump all the way or one that isn't going to be able to jump again after landing. I think more the latter than former as it can't do bounding runs.

[Zer0 Kay]

Given that the Glitterboy doesn't have to roll for damage to its legs every time it makes a jet-assisted leap, I'd grandfather it for the 'cat-like landing'...mind you, it will land more like a sabertooth tiger with a full stomach than a housecat, but it will be on its feet.

see right there, your assuming that it means on two feet and any other kind of landing requires a roll for damage.

Lets see, other things that jump but don't have cat-like grace:
Kangaroo family
Dogs (especially gun dogs like Springers for amazing vertical or grey hounds for horizontal, a run like that is a low leap )
Monkeys
Frogs
I'm sure the list goes on, but here is the important one, humans. Huh, you may say, ski jumping I respond. How high in the air are they when they leave the jump? How far do they go?
How often do they get seriously hurt? No really, I don't know. Now our PCs have received training or have simply learned skills, I think how to land from a jet assisted leap in a PA without attitude controls or even intentionally designed for jet assisted leaps and no thrusters in the feet to break foward velocity, or that should have expended all its thrust energy on jump in order to travel maximum distance, without taking damage may be one of those.

So I suggest that a Glitterboy or or any other PA that has jet assisted leaps but does not state that it makes cat like landings does instead perform an arc and at the end actually has to run off the remaing momentum. And if you play out level 0 they'd have to roll with fall for no damage or faceplant for half. There that's my house rule.

[Zer0 Kay]

Aurora blazer can because of its VTOL thrusters
Blue Hawk can not.
Cougar can, it has leg thrusters.
Delilah can with back AND LEG thrusters
Demon Slayer can not
Enforcer Guardsmen can with its back
Forester can do it AND DOESN'T EVEN HAVE THRUSTERS!!
Grease Monkey too!!
Ironwing can not
JK1A and JK1B both have thrusters but only the JK1B has cat-like landings!?
Lynx, cuz of thrusters
Mantis C&P from Lynx
Med-Rec can't even with jet pack
Midas can
Prophet can
Protege can
Red Hawk can't
Sampson Mk III can
Silent shadow can't do cat like but has bird like
Thunder Hound can

What have we learned from this?
Though nets probably help it isn't thruster that grant the ability. All flight capable suits don't have it and some without thrusters have it while two suits almost identical, not with thrusters has one that can and one that can't. It tells me unless an armor says it has the ability, it doesn't.

[Warshield73]

Thanks for the input everybody. Ever since we started playing with the old RMB in 1990 one of the issues we have always had is how far can a robot vehicle, power armor, or even a hover vehicle drop without damage. We had always just used a multiple of the leap + vehicle height so I really like the "cat-like landing" and under the hover vehicles the new rules for dead drop and max altitude.

I want to put up a few of my basic assumptions that I am operating from:

1-To me this is not a new ability, but simply something that has always existed but is finally being quantified. I base this on all the older vehicles (Samson PA, Speedster hovercycle) that now have these stats and didn't have them in previous books that had those vehicles. I mean the Speedster is the oldest hovercycle in Rifts, appearing in RMB, but it never had the max altitude or max drop height. All the other stats are the same as it has appeared in about 4 other books but now it has those stats.

2-Any vehicle that can leap can have this. I base this on a few things: first most power armors that were listed as not have "cat-like landing" can actually fly (Blue Hawk, Ironwing, Red Hawk) and of course if you can fly you don't need it "cat-like landing" you just, well land. Second, in NG1 the Super Max Robot vehicle has this ability, it is not listed separately like in NG2 but listed with it's leap as a drop of 1,000 feet to "land on it's feet like a cat" indicating that it is not just a matter of thrusters but also leg construction and toughness. To me the Forester really shows this.

3-"Cat-like" just means how far it can fall without injuring the pilot and landing on it's feet. I don't think they meant it to imply stealth or anything else just - "a cat always lands on it's feet" idea. I am sue this is why they used it instead of kangaroo or frog. If it was meant to imply stealth I believe it would include something about prowl. Also, I have never really played the hover jets or jet packs of Rifts as particularly quiet unless they have some sort of prowl and the fact that certain jet packs and hovercycles like the prowler are specifically designed to be quiet backs me up.

I have to admit, it might have been better if they had just called this a "Dead Drop" or just drop height, something like they did with hover vehicles in the book.

4-I assume, and I think correctly, that all robot vehicles and any flying power armors are fly (or run)-by-wire systems like modern vectored thrust jet fighters and not simple macros for complex maneuvers. To me this just makes sense as it is the pilot that fly's and dodges and not the computer.

5-This ability is pretty specifically a vertical drop. It says over and over "drop or leap down from as high as" which tells me there is no arc involved and no momentum to run off.

Again thanks for the ideas everyone. As my new group is starting in 102 PA my players are using all older vehicles and I am really trying to give them a good idea over the vehicles capabilities.

[Alrik Vas]

I think those are sound assumptions, Warshield. I'd have never assumed it was some kind of ninja landing of silence with all the grace of a ballerina either. I just figured it was, "land without taking damage."

The macro thing, though, i could see it as both. Though i'm not actually familiar with how fly-by-wire works. If it's computer assisted, then it makes sense you could program the computer to do a set of things at the push of a button (or voice command, whatever) when you need it to.

[guardiandashi]

I think those are sound assumptions, Warshield. I'd have never assumed it was some kind of ninja landing of silence with all the grace of a ballerina either. I just figured it was, "land without taking damage."

The macro thing, though, i could see it as both. Though i'm not actually familiar with how fly-by-wire works. If it's computer assisted, then it makes sense you could program the computer to do a set of things at the push of a button (or voice command, whatever) when you need it to.

fly by wire is computer controlled/computer assisted controls. Basically the operator uses the controls to tell the computer what they want to do, then the computer makes it happen.

this is especially common/required in some of the newer combat aircraft that are designed to be "dynamically unstable" IE they are constantly out of control and being brought back under control by the computer.

[glitterboy2098]

I think those are sound assumptions, Warshield. I'd have never assumed it was some kind of ninja landing of silence with all the grace of a ballerina either. I just figured it was, "land without taking damage."

The macro thing, though, i could see it as both. Though i'm not actually familiar with how fly-by-wire works. If it's computer assisted, then it makes sense you could program the computer to do a set of things at the push of a button (or voice command, whatever) when you need it to.

fly by wire is computer controlled/computer assisted controls. Basically the operator uses the controls to tell the computer what they want to do, then the computer makes it happen.

this is especially common/required in some of the newer combat aircraft that are designed to be "dynamically unstable" IE they are constantly out of control and being brought back under control by the computer.

a macro is basically a computer program set up so that when you do one thing, the program makes a series or several series of things, to occur in the right order to do what you want.

so for example, your in arobot, and you want to turn left.. you press the footpedal to steer, then the computer automatically does an image recognition on the ground to guage the motion of the leg and foot needed, and sends instructions ot the motors needed to pull that off.

for a safe landing, it would automatically detect that the robot/PA has started falling, guages the distance, and fires thrusters and/or adjusts the placement of the legs to ensure the landing occurs in a fashion that does the least damage and preserved balance. if the fall is too high, it still does it, but the impact causes damage because the energy/stresses involved are higher than the bot is rated for.

[Warshield73]

I think those are sound assumptions, Warshield. I'd have never assumed it was some kind of ninja landing of silence with all the grace of a ballerina either. I just figured it was, "land without taking damage."

The macro thing, though, i could see it as both. Though i'm not actually familiar with how fly-by-wire works. If it's computer assisted, then it makes sense you could program the computer to do a set of things at the push of a button (or voice command, whatever) when you need it to.

fly by wire is computer controlled/computer assisted controls. Basically the operator uses the controls to tell the computer what they want to do, then the computer makes it happen.

this is especially common/required in some of the newer combat aircraft that are designed to be "dynamically unstable" IE they are constantly out of control and being brought back under control by the computer.

a macro is basically a computer program set up so that when you do one thing, the program makes a series or several series of things, to occur in the right order to do what you want.

so for example, your in arobot, and you want to turn left.. you press the footpedal to steer, then the computer automatically does an image recognition on the ground to guage the motion of the leg and foot needed, and sends instructions ot the motors needed to pull that off.

for a safe landing, it would automatically detect that the robot/PA has started falling, guages the distance, and fires thrusters and/or adjusts the placement of the legs to ensure the landing occurs in a fashion that does the least damage and preserved balance. if the fall is too high, it still does it, but the impact causes damage because the energy/stresses involved are higher than the bot is rated for.

I understand where you are coming from on this. However, I have not seen anything in Rifts, or modern military vehicles, that would suggest these power armors would operate like that. Sure there is going to be a degree of computer control but it is not an Ford with parking assist. Combat situations would be much more dynamic than this.

[glitterboy2098]

except it isn't a special feature like it is on the car.. it is a fundamental function of how the bot manages to work in the first place. without process like that, they'd be unable to walk, run, or do any kind of effective movement.

our own minds do all that without it being conciously recognized, so we tend not to think much about how much effort is involved in just walking.. but look at toddlers, and how they walk before they get the experiance at..they start barely able to stay up, and through a lot of trial and error gain the mental programming needed to move smoothly. and as engineers and programmers today are finding, making a machine able to do it is a lot harder than you'd think. it is more than just making the parts move forward a bit, you have to account for hundreds of variables to maintain the dynamic stability of the whole, or you fall over.

even powered armor has to do a lot of this.. they have to be able to read all the cues from the wearer's movements, then calculate exactly how to move the suit's limbs to match, with whatever force amplification is required. and how much is required depends on the action.. they'd need to know how to distinguish the careful movements used to protect something fragile from the movements designed to crush, for example. some of this would be the pilot obviously (one would expect using your suit to carry egg's would be part of training to teach you how to do it right), but a lot of it will anticipatory programming on the part of the suit.

without these kinds of computer controls, a robot or a PA is little more than an expensive piece of modern art.. unable to do anything.

[Zer0 Kay]

Thanks for the input everybody. Ever since we started playing with the old RMB in 1990 one of the issues we have always had is how far can a robot vehicle, power armor, or even a hover vehicle drop without damage. We had always just used a multiple of the leap + vehicle height so I really like the "cat-like landing" and under the hover vehicles the new rules for dead drop and max altitude.

I want to put up a few of my basic assumptions that I am operating from:

1-To me this is not a new ability, but simply something that has always existed but is finally being quantified. I base this on all the older vehicles (Samson PA, Speedster hovercycle) that now have these stats and didn't have them in previous books that had those vehicles. I mean the Speedster is the oldest hovercycle in Rifts, appearing in RMB, but it never had the max altitude or max drop height. All the other stats are the same as it has appeared in about 4 other books but now it has those stats.

2-Any vehicle that can leap can have this. I base this on a few things: first most power armors that were listed as not have "cat-like landing" can actually fly (Blue Hawk, Ironwing, Red Hawk) and of course if you can fly you don't need it "cat-like landing" you just, well land. Second, in NG1 the Super Max Robot vehicle has this ability, it is not listed separately like in NG2 but listed with it's leap as a drop of 1,000 feet to "land on it's feet like a cat" indicating that it is not just a matter of thrusters but also leg construction and toughness. To me the Forester really shows this.

3-"Cat-like" just means how far it can fall without injuring the pilot and landing on it's feet. I don't think they meant it to imply stealth or anything else just - "a cat always lands on it's feet" idea. I am sue this is why they used it instead of kangaroo or frog. If it was meant to imply stealth I believe it would include something about prowl. Also, I have never really played the hover jets or jet packs of Rifts as particularly quiet unless they have some sort of prowl and the fact that certain jet packs and hovercycles like the prowler are specifically designed to be quiet backs me up.

I have to admit, it might have been better if they had just called this a "Dead Drop" or just drop height, something like they did with hover vehicles in the book.

4-I assume, and I think correctly, that all robot vehicles and any flying power armors are fly (or run)-by-wire systems like modern vectored thrust jet fighters and not simple macros for complex maneuvers. To me this just makes sense as it is the pilot that fly's and dodges and not the computer.

5-This ability is pretty specifically a vertical drop. It says over and over "drop or leap down from as high as" which tells me there is no arc involved and no momentum to run off.

Again thanks for the ideas everyone. As my new group is starting in 102 PA my players are using all older vehicles and I am really trying to give them a good idea over the vehicles capabilities.

So according to you then the Juicer power armor that has two variants an A and a B and both have jump jets then both have the cat-like landing, even though it specifically states that the A does NOT have it? As long as you realize your creating a house rule.

[Zer0 Kay]

I think those are sound assumptions, Warshield. I'd have never assumed it was some kind of ninja landing of silence with all the grace of a ballerina either. I just figured it was, "land without taking damage."

The macro thing, though, i could see it as both. Though i'm not actually familiar with how fly-by-wire works. If it's computer assisted, then it makes sense you could program the computer to do a set of things at the push of a button (or voice command, whatever) when you need it to.

fly by wire is computer controlled/computer assisted controls. Basically the operator uses the controls to tell the computer what they want to do, then the computer makes it happen.

this is especially common/required in some of the newer combat aircraft that are designed to be "dynamically unstable" IE they are constantly out of control and being brought back under control by the computer.

a macro is basically a computer program set up so that when you do one thing, the program makes a series or several series of things, to occur in the right order to do what you want.

so for example, your in arobot, and you want to turn left.. you press the footpedal to steer, then the computer automatically does an image recognition on the ground to guage the motion of the leg and foot needed, and sends instructions ot the motors needed to pull that off.

for a safe landing, it would automatically detect that the robot/PA has started falling, guages the distance, and fires thrusters and/or adjusts the placement of the legs to ensure the landing occurs in a fashion that does the least damage and preserved balance. if the fall is too high, it still does it, but the impact causes damage because the energy/stresses involved are higher than the bot is rated for.

I understand where you are coming from on this. However, I have not seen anything in Rifts, or modern military vehicles, that would suggest these power armors would operate like that. Sure there is going to be a degree of computer control but it is not an Ford with parking assist. Combat situations would be much more dynamic than this.

Um... the cat like landing is exactly like a Ford with parking assist.

[Warshield73]

except it isn't a special feature like it is on the car.. it is a fundamental function of how the bot manages to work in the first place. without process like that, they'd be unable to walk, run, or do any kind of effective movement.

our own minds do all that without it being conciously recognized, so we tend not to think much about how much effort is involved in just walking.. but look at toddlers, and how they walk before they get the experiance at..they start barely able to stay up, and through a lot of trial and error gain the mental programming needed to move smoothly. and as engineers and programmers today are finding, making a machine able to do it is a lot harder than you'd think. it is more than just making the parts move forward a bit, you have to account for hundreds of variables to maintain the dynamic stability of the whole, or you fall over.

even powered armor has to do a lot of this.. they have to be able to read all the cues from the wearer's movements, then calculate exactly how to move the suit's limbs to match, with whatever force amplification is required. and how much is required depends on the action.. they'd need to know how to distinguish the careful movements used to protect something fragile from the movements designed to crush, for example. some of this would be the pilot obviously (one would expect using your suit to carry egg's would be part of training to teach you how to do it right), but a lot of it will anticipatory programming on the part of the suit.

without these kinds of computer controls, a robot or a PA is little more than an expensive piece of modern art.. unable to do anything.

This description I mostly agree with, this is fly-by-wire. I think your earlier use of macro just though me.

[Warshield73]

So according to you then the Juicer power armor that has two variants an A and a B and both have jump jets then both have the cat-like landing, even though it specifically states that the A does NOT have it? As long as you realize you’re creating a house rule.

Yes I absolutely realize I am creating a house rule, that was the point of the OP to get peoples feedback from others on a house rule that would be in the spirit of a new rule in the newest book.

As for your assertion about the juicer power armor (and it is your assertion, not mine), I am not talking about adding this ability to every power armor that does not have it, just those whose thruster powered leap seems to warrant it. Now as far as the two juicer power armors and whether to add the cat-like-landing to the one that does not have it, no of course the A does not get it. These two are not even close to identical, did you read the entire description?

The 1B, which has the Cat-like-landing, can leap 70 feet further then the A model. The B model is more advanced with fewer penalties, more MDC, and is described in the book as being 10% larger with limited hover flight capabilities. I am talking about taking two power armors with nearly identical or similar leaping and thruster abilities and simply giving them the new stat (like they did with the old hover cycles and dead drop), you are comparing two power armors with completely different relevant stats and trying to discredit it.