Reading rules and explaining them to someone the question was asked - Do
Dead Fall Ordinance (DFO) count towards number of weapons on a
VTOL/Aerospace design?
I always assumed yes.
But if they are counted as ammo markers which they may "...also..." carry does
this imply they are in addition to maximum number of weapons per vehicle size?
I say no but I've been wrong before.
Gracias,
Glenn asked:
> Do Dead Fall Ordinance (DFO) count towards number of weapons on a
I don't think so. And I don't think it matters too much because of the
capacity costs of DFO of 4 capacity per marker means that there's little room
for anything else offensive without interfering with the purpose of the
vehicle. 1 DFO requires Size 1 vehicle 2 DFO requires Size 2 vehicle 3 DFO
requires Size 3 vehicle 4 DFO requires Size 4 vehicle 5 DFO requires Size 4
vehicle 6 DFO requires Size 5 vehicle 7 DFO requires Size 6 vehicle 8 DFO
requires Size 7 vehicle
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:40:22 +1300 "Andrew Martin" <Al.Bri@xtra.co.nz>
writes:
> Glenn asked:
The question came up with a VTOL Size 2 design SLAM/3 (Fixed so 6 cap
and
a DFO cap 4, followed by a munchkinist attempt to fit multiple SLAm/3's
on a larger system (to vehicle size max) *plus* a DFO, IIRC. "But in says
'also' type argument."
> 1 DFO requires Size 1 vehicle
Never thought of oversize aerospace or VTOL vehicles.... Can you do that?
Better reread rules.
> 8 DFO requires Size 7 vehicle
Same problem in general as the GMS/H system on AFV's.
Gracias,
> --- Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@juno.com> wrote:
> The question came up with a VTOL Size 2 design
Perfectly orthodox. Not my choice--using DFOs blows
part of the point of VTOLs, but that's your problem.
followed by a munchkinist attempt to
> fit multiple SLAm/3's
That would be pretty much impossible. SLAM/3 requires
size 6. Each size class allows 5 capacity points
each. So your size 4 VTOL can only have 3 SLAM/3s,
and has only 2 size points left. Etc, etc.
But using 4 SLAM/2s (which is pretty pointless, they
are too small to kill anything dangerous) on a size 4 vehicle, plus a DFO fits
onto a vehicle. This is illegal, as page 11 states "No vehicle may be fitted
with more weapon systems than its basic size class;
thus a class-3 vehicle could carry no more than three
weapons systems. Multiple mounts count every barrel
towards this limit, and a Point-defense system counts
towards the total as well. The only weapon NOT counted in this total is a
single APSW, as below:" So the DFO counts, and your associate is a little turd
for trying to break the rules.
> Never thought of oversize aerospace or VTOL
Page 15 states "Oversize vehicles may in general use whatever mobility type is
desired." I mean, how else
do you explain the B-52?
> John Atkinson wrote:
> But using 4 SLAM/2s (which is pretty pointless, they
...which is probably one of the reasons why SLAMs aren't available in sizes
below 3 according to the DS2 rules :-/
Regards,
> --- Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> wrote:
In which case you have to be using really shady math to try and fit all those
SLAMs AND a DFO.
On Sun, 13 Jan 2002 18:00:02 -0800 (PST) John Atkinson
> <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> writes:
Agreed
> followed by a munchkinist attempt to
I prefer to think that he has not had a sufficient amount of time to
absorb the ethos of war games, and the dangers - real and perceptual -
of this kind of munchkinism. What experience this individual has had is
definitely not in the vein of GZG rules but one of the 'other G' companies
which shall, like Voldemort, be unnamed.
> Never thought of oversize aerospace or VTOL
Good point. Definitely not a dive bomber.
Gracias,
> --- Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@juno.com> wrote:
> I prefer to think that he has not had a sufficient
Ah. May I suggest my patented "12-step" recovery
program for gaming fools:
1)Mild reproof. 2)Snarling 3)Dice tossing. 4)Smack to back of head with hand
5)Smack to back of head with rolled up rulebook. 6)Decapitation.
7-12) Under development
:)
> At 2:02 PM -0800 1/15/02, John Atkinson wrote:
Might I suggest belt fed weapons here?
That's gotta hurt, getting squished between disintegrating links and rammed
through a receiver and spit out on the other side, while subjected to intense
heat and pressure...
--Binhan
> At 2:02 PM -0800 1/15/02, John Atkinson wrote:
> From: "B Lin" <lin@rxkinetix.com>
Not to mention the firing pin hitting you, and the noise..... I like the
twisted way people on this list think.....
John said:
> Ah. May I suggest my patented "12-step" recovery
Are you sure "decapitation" shouldn't be more like "step ten"? That leaves
room before for "smack to back of head with club" "remove all valuables", etc
while still leaving room on the far end for "burn the body" and "exorcise the
ghost".