Author Topic: SM: Privateers VM Construction & Design: Armaments - Missile Launcher (Read 5242 times)

Defendi · « **Reply #20 on:** March 24, 2011, 04:03:08 PM »

The two missile launchers I'd just make two mk 10 pallets. Remind me what an MRLS is.

Defendi · « **Reply #21 on:** March 24, 2011, 04:04:24 PM »

Or two tubes if they have a magazine.

markc · « **Reply #22 on:** March 24, 2011, 04:08:36 PM »

A MLRS is a Multiple Launch Rocket System; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M270_Multiple_Launch_Rocket_System .

Which I see has 12 rounds and can fire all of them in <40s or 2 in 10s.

MDC

Defendi · « **Reply #23 on:** March 24, 2011, 04:28:26 PM »

Okay, sorry. I'm at work and can't back read. What I should have said is, "Remind me why you're asking me how to model this." What's the problem with a missile launcher that it doesn't work for what you're trying to do?

markc · « **Reply #24 on:** March 24, 2011, 04:46:15 PM »

From my understanding the OP is having trouble modeling the 12 round system MLRS system. He does not know whether it is a torpedo launcher or a missile system.
From my understanding of the rules missile launchers in SM:P are systems that have a short range (resolved that round), can only have 1 missile launcher mounted on a turret; and torpedo's have longer ranges, can maneuver, can have EW and can be launched from a payload pallet or a torpedo launcher.

On the USS Bainbridge the missile launcher shows that it has 2 rails for rounds to launch from and it has a magazine located in the ship. I said that IMHO it would be a torpedo launcher in SM:P and that I would have a house rule that states a torp launcher can be modified to fire multiple torpedoes of lesser MK numbers. So a Mk 20 torpedo launcher can be modified to fire 2 MK 10 torpedoes. I did not give a weight and vol mod for the modification of the higher torp launcher to the multiple lesser launcher.

I will have to think more on the other things as this discussion has been going on for quite a while about the rules and putting them into a spreed sheet, both of the SM2 and SM:P rules.

Thanks
MDC

snrdg051306 · « **Reply #25 on:** March 24, 2011, 04:58:43 PM »

A fighter with two hard points mount a fixed missile launcher firing mechanism on each point. There isn't any need to have a magazine, not to mention not enough space. So I'll have to disagree with MarkC that a FM must have a mandatory magazine.

Defendi · « **Reply #26 on:** March 24, 2011, 05:05:09 PM »

Well, from what you're saying there a missile launcher with a 12 missile magazine would just be a missile launcher with a 12 missile magazine. Unless you have a compelling reason to do otherwise.

I don't see the reason to houserule the two rail torpedo launcher. Just make it two tubes. I suspect this might be being overthought somewhere.

snrdg051306 · « **Reply #27 on:** March 24, 2011, 05:05:44 PM »

Okay, I'll agree Defendi, that the projectile, missile, torpedo, and ammo for the auto/projectile cannons, don't have a firing arc. However, the mount that holds the projectile has to be pointed in the general direction of the target, which is a firing arc.

Defendi · « **Reply #28 on:** March 24, 2011, 05:12:55 PM »

Unless I've forgotten a rule I wrote (and that's really very possible), payload pallets don't have firing arcs. You can house rule they do if you really want to, but since a torpedo and just turn around and go any direction it wants, it doesn't have any appreciable game effect.

Defendi · « **Reply #29 on:** March 24, 2011, 05:15:55 PM »

However, I should remind you that you can play the game any way you like and you can change the rules any way you like. ICE stripped the budget from the Rules Police years ago. They can't even afford a proper battering ram any longer.

markc · « **Reply #30 on:** March 24, 2011, 05:40:05 PM »

Quote from: snrdg051306 on March 24, 2011, 04:58:43 PM

A fighter with two hard points mount a fixed missile launcher firing mechanism on each point. There isn't any need to have a magazine, not to mention not enough space. So I'll have to disagree with MarkC that a FM must have a mandatory magazine.

Again IMHO a missile launcher FM is just the mechanism to fire the missile. I guess you could add the weight of 1 round to the FM but IMHO again you do not want to fly around with 1 round in the FM.
There is a rule from BattleTec about single shot missile launchers that says they weigh 1/2 as much as a launcher with a mag, IIRC.

Defendi;
Rules Police

I think they invested in the Cheep Trick song Dream Police idea so you cannot see them and they act upon your subconscious while you are in REM sleep. But I could be wrong as I am a volenteer mod.

All;
I am a big believer in adapting the rules to your game or universe. Just write out what you have changed and maybe why you have changed the rules. In fact if you post them here someone may say hay that is a good idea and should be in the rules or we should change a rules so that can be done.

MDC

snrdg051306 · « **Reply #31 on:** March 24, 2011, 06:18:21 PM »

You maybe correct Defendi that I'm over thinking the concept of a missiles and torpedo launchers.

I'm a retired submarine sailor and an grew-up as an USAF brat which has given me a chance to look it stuff like missiles, torpedoes, and ammo for cannons. The limitation of a single missile firing mechanism on a piece of ordnance (SM: P VM p. 92) or mount (SM: P VM p. 107) just doesn't jibe with the stuff I know about in the real world.

Torpedoes, from my experience in submarines, are loaded into tubes, one torpedo per tube. Of course the reason is that to torpedo has to get from the dry environment of the tube to the water without flooding the people tank, aka pressure hull side where the crew are dry. Early warships that carried torpedoes had multiple tubes, carrying 1 torpedo per tube, mounted on a trainable base that provided a firing arc.

Missiles, from my interest in the military, follow the same basic pattern of 1 missile = 1 firing mechanism. In order to get more fire power, someone decided to build a frame around several firing mechanisms, load them with missiles, okay rockets, and the launch them in the direction of the target. Today, there are a number of systems that have multiple firing mechanisms mounted on a single frame that can be adjusted in azimuth and elevation.

The vertical launch system designed for Tomahawk missiles is a box with multiple launchers, firing mechanisms. From the discussion with MarkC this is is not valid for missiles in SM: P, unless I call them torpedoes. This is just working for me.

To me the only differences between SM2 and SM: P is effectively guidance, EW, and engagement duration. Torpedoes are bigger and house better guidance systems, have EW, and can track a target. Missiles are smaller, faster, with limited range, and basically no guidance systems.

I have just taken a strong dislike to missiles and torpedoes in SM: P and SM2. Of course if I can ever get this straight in my head I'll change my very feeble and old mind.

Defendi · « **Reply #32 on:** March 24, 2011, 06:54:23 PM »

I'm sorry, I didn't realize this was a house rule discussion. It was very improper for me to get involved. Please accept my apology.

Defendi · « **Reply #33 on:** March 24, 2011, 07:34:42 PM »

Oh, and fear me and my tinfoil hat.

snrdg051306 · « **Reply #34 on:** March 24, 2011, 08:16:50 PM »

Defendi,

Please accept my apology if my comments have lead you to believe that this discussion is anything but a request for help in understanding the SM: P construction rules. I try to design systems the a valid within the construction rule set of the gaming systems I have. At this point I'm totally confused on the construction of a missile launcher FM.

Having you provide assistance is unexpected, but greatly appreciated. Personally, I very glad that you have taken the time to review this topic. Know that you are always welcome to set me straight on any question I ask. But be gentle;-) I'm an old man and I take a lot longer to heal.

Respectfully,

Defendi · « **Reply #35 on:** March 24, 2011, 08:21:36 PM »

Oh no worries. I just thought I'd started an argument about a house rule, and when the developer does that, it's ALWAYS bad news.

snrdg051306 · « **Reply #36 on:** March 24, 2011, 08:24:02 PM »

This is an edit to my post made today 3/24 at 06:18:21 pm.

Quote

The vertical launch system designed for Tomahawk missiles is a box with multiple launchers, firing mechanisms. From the discussion with MarkC this is is not valid for missiles in SM: P, unless I call them torpedoes. This is just working for me.

Change the highlighted sentence in the quote to read This is just not working for me.

I could have sworn not was in the original post.

snrdg051306 · « **Reply #37 on:** March 24, 2011, 08:29:16 PM »

Needing to stir-up some trouble now and then is a good thing, provided the masses don't trample you.

Again thank-you for your time.

I don't need to make up house rules, since I have such a talent for breaking the existing rules. I really do mean to though it just happens.

Now someone else around here seems to have some good ones.

markc · « **Reply #38 on:** March 24, 2011, 08:55:25 PM »

Old? I think I might be among the oldest here being born in 67. Yes 1667.

Defendi;
No this is a rules legal discussion but my proposed solutions did not seem to work well. So I thought of some alternates that might work and that IMHO could be official.

MDC

Defendi · « **Reply #39 on:** March 25, 2011, 10:14:05 AM »

Sweet. All of the rules legal questions have been answered though, so just let me know if you have another that the list can't handle.

News:

Author Topic: SM: Privateers VM Construction & Design: Armaments - Missile Launcher (Read 5242 times)