NEWS

Vehicle launch weapons

  • 36 Replies
  • 15077 Views

mike-in-the-box

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 4
« Reply #30 on: <06-05-11/1327:59> »
Well, i never claimed that the rules are clear...unfortunately they are not.

I think you can, according to the rules, launch missiles without weapon mounts, the number of missiles that can fit under a normal aircraft should be limited by common sense (4 to 8 missiles, i assume). 
This way many of the SR combat aircrafts would make sense (at least more than a combat aircraft with either 1 missile or 1 cannon).

In the case of the vehicle weapons, i really believe they mean "reinforced weapon mounts".

That would mean that you can equip your aircraft with a cannon and some missiles.

Mike



hobgoblin

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 523
  • Panda!
« Reply #31 on: <06-05-11/1335:59> »
Usually when they expect common sense to be applied they slip in a "GM has the final say" line...
Want to see my flash new jacket?

hobgoblin

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 523
  • Panda!
« Reply #32 on: <06-05-11/1346:04> »
Meh, i wonder if a 600Y (3 times the ammo bin price of 200Y) rack would be in order. This with the limit that they can only be used on reinforced external mounts but take up no mod slots (adding them require a kit), and can only hold launch weapons (3 pr rack, of the same kind).
Want to see my flash new jacket?

mike-in-the-box

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 4
« Reply #33 on: <06-05-11/1348:34> »
Maybe, but thats the only solution i can find that make a little sense and fit to the rules....

I mean, why do they write that vehicle weapons need a mount, but under launch weapons only write can be "released from the wings of aircraft s and helicopters" without even mention a weapon mount?

Mike


hobgoblin

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 523
  • Panda!
« Reply #34 on: <06-05-11/1415:40> »
Well they are a sub section of vehicle weapons, and the opening there mentions weapon mounts in generic terms.
Want to see my flash new jacket?

mike-in-the-box

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 4
« Reply #35 on: <06-05-11/1449:57> »
I know, but the question is: count the subsections as special rules (they sound like special rules)? If not, the authors made a really bad job (at least in my eyes).


Mike
« Last Edit: <06-05-11/1652:48> by mike-in-the-box »

hobgoblin

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 523
  • Panda!
« Reply #36 on: <06-05-11/1453:35> »
Well there was some issues with the release sequence thanks to the license transition from Fanpro to Catalyst, iirc.

So it could be that we are looking at a side effect of that. Sadly FAQ updates and Erratas have been on the back burner compared to new releases. Likely to try and get some profits going after the Catalyst financial mess...
Want to see my flash new jacket?