"Tracked vs. Hover" Topic

A bit of a blog post…what would you choose for sci-fi gaming, tracked or hover tanks:

link

Anti-Grav, but that's just me.

They're both really nice looking models but I prefer the tracked version.

Tracked for me as well. I thought these were designed for 1946, or some such.

I would go hover only because I could use them for playing Hammer's Slammers.

I would need to know the technology paradigm for the forces involved… while 2300 AD has basically similar technology across the board, Fifth Frontier War can involve ground forces still at the pre-industrial level.

Both.

Small number of nimble, hi-tech aggressors vs simple, plodding locals.

Blowers as we know them are a bit fiddly, but 'hi-tech' future would probably make them THE thing. Right engines and conformal air bodies, and they could be the equivalent of gravs, though not those, in my eyes.

Doug

I'd like both as I would assume that they would have advantages in different environments.

Tracked for me, never cared for hovercraft.

I was reading a site on the Vietnam brown water Navy and it mentioned something I hadn't thought about. The PACV (Patrol Air Cushion Vehicle) was very fast and could get where needed soon BUT it was hellishly noisy. You would be know to be coming, no surprise. So given that in any game system it would make itself known far in advance. I know tracked vehicles are loud but as soon as these enter the game there could be no "hidden" deployment.

That particular model, tracked. Skirts look funny on that model.

Personally, I like things like the "thunderbirds" from Shadowrun:

For a major scifi hovertank, I want something that looks like it can actually fly. I've been kicking around an idea, but I don't have the computer drafting skills to get it out of my head and into a model.

Both look great – for near-modern I like the tracks, for a little further ahead in the future I think that the hover version would be more suitable

As to which would be more practical, as noted depends a lot on how the hover system works – if it is noisy fiddly fans, not so much of an advantage, but tracks are not exactly maintenance light either, as the ex-tankers among us can attest to

I do not regard hover as anti-grav. The stability principles are different. Tracks would be better than hover, in mountains, forest and other irregular terrain. I have crossed water in both tracks and hover craft. Both will do the job but hover is faster. Hover would be better in sandy deserts but not rocky ones. In summary tracks would be better in more terrain types. From a production cost level, tracks are cheaper and easier to produce.

Anti-grav uses different concepts and should be effective over all terrain types. The down side is that they are expensive to produce and maintain.

I look at it in a different point of view. The planet you are trying to conquer may have high gravitational fluxes. rendering grav vehicles inpractible. acv are great except in high winds planetary environment. Tracked at good except in high gravity worlds. But in a production point of view. Tracks are easier and more accessible to most environments.

Anti-Grav

They're just cool.

Zhodani tanks….

If you are thinking for low-mid tech forces – either could work depending on the setting.

I like the tracked one slightly more, but both look really good.

From the two choices I'd go tracked

For that tank….tracked.

All of the above. It's sci-fi, and tech will vary from faction to faction, world to world, force to force. Hell, for me, that's half the fun…

Leland R. Erickson
Metal Express
silent-death.mx

Landspeeders, honestly that is what gets me going.