The Unoffial 2056 Vehicle Guide

[kjamma4]

Originally Posted by 43Supporter

1) There *are* firing ports to the outside -- how else does he fire the twin 0.50s?

I thought we were talking about personal weapons, not vehicular ones???? I don't recall ball turret gunners firing pistols (or fire extinguishers) when they were in the ball.

Originally Posted by 43Supporter

2) The gunner inside *could* get himself out -- the notion of him being unable to is a misinterpretation of the limitations of the B-17's non- retractable mount; the gunner could enter/exit into the airplane only if the guns were pointed straight down, which was not possible while the airplane was on the ground.

Again, I'm talking about Car Wars. There is no provision for a crewmember to exit the CA but not the vehicle.

Your point about editors is well taken.

[43Supporter]

Originally Posted by kjamma4

I thought we were talking about personal weapons, not vehicular ones???? I don't recall ball turret gunners firing pistols (or fire extinguishers) when they were in the ball.

Ball-turret gunners didn't fire hand weapons because there wasn't anything a
hand weapon could hit out there ('cept maybe another bomber...); a PFE
might have been usable inside, but outside, again, there was nothing to shoot.
The BT isn't a very good parallel for a CAed car crewman, but there aren't any
better parallels out there.

Originally Posted by kjamma4

Again, I'm talking about Car Wars. There is no provision for a crewmember to exit the CA but not the vehicle.

I'd assume that if there was open space in the car, the crewman in the CA
could move from the CA to the space, and/or to the outside; there would
of course be locks on the CA suited to whether the idea is to keep stuff in
the CA, or out of it (for ex.: The prisoner-transport SUV in _VG2_ has CA
around the prisoner-holding area, IIRC; the locks would therefore be only
on the outside of the CA, to keep the prisoners inside; conversely, a car with
CA around the driver would have locks on the inside, so bad guys can't pull
him out).

[Hemlock]

*bump*

for no reason

[klausbreuer]

Originally Posted by Racer

Here's one of my nasty Division 10 arena Compacts :

SMASHER '56 : Compact , X-hvy Chassis , Imp. suspension , Medium power plant w/PCs , 4 SBHD tires , Driver , ATG w/APFSDS ammo front , SWC , Sloped Plastic Armour : F50 , R40 , L40 , B40 , T13 , U10 , 2-5pt Wheelguards back . 2-5pt hubs front . Accel 5mph , Top speed 90mph , HC 2 , 4,378lbs. , $9,460

Hi!

I'm currently testing my CarDesigner program, and entered this vehicle (I plan to enter them all ;)

I get sightly different data in space and cost - is this a bug in my system or a miscalculation? Did I simply misunderstand something?

The description comes up like this:
Compact, Extra Heavy Chassis, Wheelguards 5 (front), Wheelguards 5 (rear), Medium Power Plant (Platinum Catalyst), Improved Suspension, Heavy-Duty Front & Rear Tires, Driver, front: ATG+SWC (Sabot), Sloped Armor F50, R40, L40, B40, T13, U10, Accel. 5, HC 1, 4298 lbs, $ 11769

My system calculates the Cost like this:
* Basic Vehicle Cost *
Compact Body: $400
+Extra Heavy Chassis: $400
+Improved Suspension: $400
=Sum: $1200
Medium Cell Engine: $1000
+Platinum Catalyst: $200
=Sum: $1200
2 Front Heavy-Duty Tires: $200
2 Rear Heavy-Duty Tires: $200
193 pt of Plastic Armor: $2509
+Sloped: $2760
+5 pt per Wheel Guard (front): $100
+5 pt per Wheel Guard (rear): $100
=Sum: $5469
---------------------
$8269

* Weapons *
ATG+SWC: $2500 +10x Ammo @ 100,00 ($1000)
---------------------
$3500

Total: $11769

while Space is calculated as follows:

* Basic Vehicle Space *
Available: 10

Sloped Armor: 2
Medium Cell Engine: 4

* Weapons *
ATG: 3
---------------------
Sum: 3

1 Crew: 2

Space remains: -1

Soooo... where did I go wrong?
Any feedback would be much appreciated!

Ciao,
Klaus

[Parody]

Originally Posted by klausbreuer

2 Front Heavy-Duty Tires: $200
2 Rear Heavy-Duty Tires: $200

The description gives these as Steelbelted Heavy-Duty tires, so $300 for each line.

Originally Posted by klausbreuer

193 pt of Plastic Armor: $2509
+Sloped: $2760
+5 pt per Wheel Guard (front): $100
+5 pt per Wheel Guard (rear): $100
=Sum: $5469

Sloping adds 10%, not 110%. So in this calculation the armor cost is 2509, +251 for sloping, +100 each for the front hubs and rear guards.

Originally Posted by klausbreuer

Sloped Armor: 2

Sloping takes 10%; for a 10-space vehicle, that's exactly 1 space.

Hope this helps.

[klausbreuer]

Originally Posted by Parody

Hope this helps.

Certainly does, thank you very much!

a) Steelbelted - whoops, my bad, forgot to add this. Worked out okay.
b) Sloping adds 10%, not 110% - thanks! When I redid the calculation to show what's going on, I kept the *1.1... nasty bug.
c) True - bug.

Since the bugs were rather major, I updated the ZIP and uploaded it again.

However, there is still a differences - more bugs from my side?

New description: Compact, Extra Heavy Chassis, Wheelguards 5 (front), Wheelguards 5 (rear), Medium Power Plant (Platinum Catalyst), Improved Suspension, Heavy-Duty Steelbelted Front & Rear Tires, Driver, front: ATG+SWC (Sabot), Sloped Armor F50, R40, L40, B40, T13, U10, Accel. 5, HC 1, 4378 lbs, $ 9460

HC is calculated as 1 instead of 2: Improved Suspension gives an HC of 2, frontal wheelguards drop this by 1. If it were a Subcompact, it would get that HC back, but it isn't - thus HC 1.
Moooost probably Yet Another Klaus Bug ;)

Thanks again for your quick answer, it's much appreciated!

Ciao,
Klaus

PS: Aaaaargh, another bug! 'Steelbelted' wasn't saved, thus weight and cost were wrong, but that's fixed now. Just the HC remains...

[Parody]

Originally Posted by klausbreuer

HC is calculated as 1 instead of 2: Improved Suspension gives an HC of 2, frontal wheelguards drop this by 1. If it were a Subcompact, it would get that HC back, but it isn't - thus HC 1.
Moooost probably Yet Another Klaus Bug ;)

It has hubs on the front, not guards:

Originally Posted by Racer

SMASHER '56 : Compact , X-hvy Chassis , Imp. suspension , Medium power plant w/PCs , 4 SBHD tires , Driver , ATG w/APFSDS ammo front , SWC , Sloped Plastic Armour : F50 , R40 , L40 , B40 , T13 , U10 , 2-5pt Wheelguards back . 2-5pt hubs front . Accel 5mph , Top speed 90mph , HC 2 , 4,378lbs. , $9,460

At least it's not a problem with the app. :)

[klausbreuer]

Originally Posted by Parody

It has hubs on the front, not guards...
At least it's not a problem with the app. :)

Weeeeeeeell... so it is a YAKB:
Compact, Extra Heavy Chassis, Wheelguards 5 (rear), Hubcaps 5 (front), Medium Power Plant (Platinum Catalyst), Improved Suspension, Heavy-Duty Steelbelted Front & Rear Tires, Driver, front: ATG+SWC (Sabot), Sloped Armor F50, R40, L40, B40, T13, U10, Accel. 5, HC 2, 4378 lbs, $ 9460

Ladies and Gentlemen, what have we learned today? Even if you're having great fun, don't do your testing at 02:30 AM...

But thanks for the quick answers! Caused me to kick out some more bugs! :-D

Ciao,
Klaus

[Racer]

Glad that was sorted out before before I got back online ! ;-)
After toying with the design for 20 odd years I hoped I'd got it right !

A question for you Klaus : Do you use +33% Damage Points for Steelbelted Tires - as corrected in 'Backfire' in ADQ 6/2 and 'Q&A' in ADQ 7/1 - or +25% DP printed in most of the Compendiums and UACFH ?

I know it dosen't affect your design program , but as my design with SBHD tires was being discussed , I'd thought I'd mention it .

[Parody]

FWIW, the CWRQ/ODQ says use 25%, acknowledging the change but going the other way because the majority of people only have the books.

SPARK uses 33%. It's an option in the CWVD but set to 25% by default.