Author Topic: Take to the air with Unfriendly Skies--new PDF product released!  (Read 5933 times)

hobgoblin

  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 524
  • Panda!
Apparently the military ones still have the lack of clarity regarding weapon mounts and launch weapons as found back in Arsenal.

Do what now? I saw a whole slew of weapon mounts listed in the standard packages for the military craft. Did you pick up the book, or are you passing along second-hand information?
Mostly that it is unclear how launch weapons and weapon mounts interact. Is it one weapon, one mount. And if so, are we talking reinforced mounts? If it is both, then those vehicles need a crapload of body (or some author handwaving) to get something that looks to have a sane loadout capacity.
Never really understood the confusion of weapon mounts. The details in Arsenal (p. 146-148) are pretty clear on how to determine weapon mounts and it's One Weapon/One Mount, just the cost of the mount differs based on the Size, Visibility, Flexibility and Control. Since Launch Weapons are almost always bigger than LMGs, they'd be reinforced mounts.
With the end result that the BF Eagle having less weapon capacity then a old F-86 Saber...
Want to see my flash new jacket?

CanRay

  • Freelancer
  • Mr. Johnson
  • *****
  • Posts: 10949
  • Spouter of Random Words
    • CanRay's Artistic Work
As they said in a previous e-book, "They don't build 'em like they used to."  Which is very true.

Military hardware is expensive.  Metahuman life is cheap.  So it's more boots on the ground than other elements and force multipliers.  Because it's more cost effective to use less force multipliers and just multiply the force the old fashioned way.

Such as Aztlan's "10,000 Miguel Army".  :P
Si vis pacem, para bellum

hobgoblin

  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 524
  • Panda!
Or send up half a dozen drones carrying missiles? Similar to how US forces operate Predator drones these days?
Want to see my flash new jacket?

PeterSmith

  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1091
With the end result that the BF Eagle having less weapon capacity then a old F-86 Saber...

Last I checked we were talking about the Shadowrun Role-Playing Game, not the Shadowrun Historical Military Simulation. If RAW says a game-current aircraft has fewer weapon slots than a historical fighter, then it has fewer weapon slots. If your group doesn't like it, houserule it.
Power corrupts.
Absolute power is kinda neat.

"Peter Smith has the deadest of deadpans and a very sly smile, making talking to him a fun game of keeping up and slinging the next subtle zinger." - Jason M. Hardy, 3 August 2015

hobgoblin

  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 524
  • Panda!
With the end result that the BF Eagle having less weapon capacity then a old F-86 Saber...

Last I checked we were talking about the Shadowrun Role-Playing Game, not the Shadowrun Historical Military Simulation. If RAW says a game-current aircraft has fewer weapon slots than a historical fighter, then it has fewer weapon slots. If your group doesn't like it, houserule it.

I know all that. I just wonder how some of the vehicles are supposed to perform their claimed role...

A Eagle that can carry barely 2 missiles or bombs, yet is supposed to operate as a fighter-bomber?
Want to see my flash new jacket?

Mäx

  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1572
With the end result that the BF Eagle having less weapon capacity then a old F-86 Saber...

Last I checked we were talking about the Shadowrun Role-Playing Game, not the Shadowrun Historical Military Simulation. If RAW says a game-current aircraft has fewer weapon slots than a historical fighter, then it has fewer weapon slots. If your group doesn't like it, houserule it.

I know all that. I just wonder how some of the vehicles are supposed to perform their claimed role...

A Eagle that can carry barely 2 missiles or bombs, yet is supposed to operate as a fighter-bomber?
And in the other end we have problems too, because just this reason they kinda went over board with the amount of weapon mounts in WAR.
CI-89 Vicious Fighter-Bomber can atleast function as a fighter bomber with it's 11 reinforced weapon mounts, but it can also now mount 11 gauss cannons :o

Changed Arsenal to WAR a per the following comment, thats what i was supposed to write there in the first place :-[
« Last Edit: (13:45:13/05-30-11) by Mäx »
"An it harm none, do what you will"

hobgoblin

  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 524
  • Panda!
With the end result that the BF Eagle having less weapon capacity then a old F-86 Saber...

Last I checked we were talking about the Shadowrun Role-Playing Game, not the Shadowrun Historical Military Simulation. If RAW says a game-current aircraft has fewer weapon slots than a historical fighter, then it has fewer weapon slots. If your group doesn't like it, houserule it.

I know all that. I just wonder how some of the vehicles are supposed to perform their claimed role...

A Eagle that can carry barely 2 missiles or bombs, yet is supposed to operate as a fighter-bomber?
And in the other end we have problems too, because just this reason they kinda went over board with the amount of weapon mounts in arsenal.
CI-89 Vicious Fighter-Bomber can atleast function as a fighter bomber with it's 11 reinforced weapon mounts, but it can also now mount 11 gauss cannons :o
That is a artifact of the mounts being generic in nature. And i think the CI-89 shows up in War, not Arsenal. Btw, going by the Arsenal mod rules that vehicle would be impossible if the mounts where not designed in.

A simple fix would be to introduce something similar to a ammo bin for launch weapons. RL military aircrafts can use racks that allow multiple bombs or missiles to attach to a single hardpoint, limited by weight and physical shape of the weapons.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Ejector_rack#Ejector_racks

One could in theory emulate this using ammo bins, except that they eat into the mod slots at an alarming rate. Also, how do one read the "doubling" effect when the weapon have a effective ammo count of 1?
Want to see my flash new jacket?

Sichr

  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 7198
  • TOTÁLNÍ FAŠÍRKA ZMRDI !!!
gut kauf :)

Really. Well spent money. Loe the book, things that flies, pictures, and many of them. Perfect piece for airport atmosphere :)

savaze

  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 341
  • I'm a zombie/quadriplegic hybrid
I'm frustrated that this book is mostly ported over aircraft from Rigger 3 and not all of the stats carried with them (cargo, load, seating, entry, fuel, economy)... That's life I suppose.

hobgoblin

  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 524
  • Panda!
Got some more numbers on the tactical aircrafts and basically they make little sense.

The helicopters are so so, but the fighter jets are just weird. For one thing none of the weapon mounts are listed as reinforced. The MiG got 3 mounts. Even if one consider them reinforced by default, that is maybe 1 gun and two launch weapons. And even funnier, it is more expensive then the SU. This even tho the SU brings 5 mounts to the fight. And they are both more expensive (tho easier to get hold of, then the CI-89 Vicious from War).

All in all, i think the game would be well served by someone sitting down and clearing up how Launch weapons are supposed to be used in game.
Want to see my flash new jacket?