10-16-2021, 02:11 PM | #91 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Silly Cars
Funny you mention this -- folks are working on using algae to make fuel; so ConTexCo (or whomever) could convert a percentage of its food-making to fuel-making, and gasoline is no longer $40/gallon....
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
11-10-2021, 08:39 PM | #92 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, UK
|
Re: Silly Cars
Was looking through NOVA vehicle pages for one , but can't find it there . Perhaps it's under Deathknight Industries or other articles pages .
So from memory : Full sized 40' Trailer , 5 Pulse HXL Left Front , 5 Pulse HXL Left Back , Pulse X-Ray Lasers in Turrets TF & TB , Four Gunners , Small Cycle PP , IFE & about 20 Laser Batteries . Cost was between $600K & $825K - not certain - & as those Lasers cost about $345K by themselves ... the higher figure is more likely . Called something like the Blacklight Marauder or something similar ? While throwing 58d+58 Damage at a target is a nice idea , it's hardly practical . I have a hardcopy printout sheet of it & may try to dig it out in morning . And $800K is also price range of small AFVs with lots of Sloped Metal Laminate Armour which is Laserproof ! (Not sure if Laserproof feature means X-Ray Lasers as well ? Regardless , 36pts of Metal Laminate [20% or 10% Slope] on Large Armoured Car or Medium Tank , will stop ALL 5d+5 shots as it can't damage or penetrate it .) Most expensive 40' Trailer I've seen in Combat Garage archive was about $938K . Again rather silly - even $269,650 of Delivery Trailer (VG2 , page 51) was a bit much for practical road use we thought back in the 90s . Give me the $193K Composite Armoured Rolling Fortress (VG2 , page 47) anytime ...
__________________
Five Gauss Guns on a Camper !!! The Resident Brit . Last edited by Racer; 11-10-2021 at 08:48 PM. |
11-11-2021, 12:49 AM | #93 | |
Join Date: Jun 2008
|
Re: Silly Cars
Quote:
You can replace the Metal Tires with Plasticores without too much difficulty (in which case you'll want to upgrade the guards and hubs to FP). Based on earlier conversations this might be the one occasion where metal hubs and guards are justified. I am not sure what the point of the fake SS are. As the weapon ports for the FCE and SS are both "Dropped Gas", there is no point in concealing the FCE if you are going to put a fake Dropped Gas weapon in the same place. Remove the fake SS's and the concealment for the FCE's and you will have exactly the same firing port configuration but save cost, space (significant), weight and the 1 firing action delay in deployment of the FCE's. There is an edge condition where someone nosing around at the truck stop (or otherwise within 1") might identify your SS's as fake. That might make them think you had no Dropped Gas (as they still wouldn't spot the concealed FCE's). That might give you a marginal edge in combat if they based their tactic on a lack of Dropped Gas, but I don't think it is worth it as in that case you might as well leave off the fake SS's and guarantee they thought you had no Dropped Gas. I think the purpose is to make them think you only have dropped gas (which is not completely implausible - merely highly unlikely). Finding the dropped gas was fake (and no other DW visible) would make them highly suspicious as no trucker is so hard up he can't afford at least a SS. The DW replenishment costs will be exorbitant :) Last edited by swordtart; 11-11-2021 at 12:56 AM. |
|
11-11-2021, 02:18 PM | #94 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Silly Cars
Quote:
(He also never could figure out why I continually handed him his head with designs costing 1/5 as much. >:) ) For semi-trailers: I like the _Hellfire_|_Brimstone_ designs, with the turret guns (if any) altered (Inc. VMGs; HESH|HEAT RRs; etc.). That kind of armor means the gangs better be packing HESH and HEAT, or they ain't ever gettin' through. (Tractors, I use my _Nashorn_ series -- RRs F; no turrets; flank attacks are handled by the trailer.)
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
|
11-11-2021, 06:28 PM | #95 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, UK
|
Re: Silly Cars
The Rolling Fortress would've been an absolute monster if Sponson Turrets had come in a few years earlier . It's weakness was always lack of firepower in forward arcs to cover the Tractor .
Four Vulcans with 180° Arcs on each side , plus two or four Turret VMGs (not forgetting Tractor VMGs) & any low level bombing run from the front would be exponentially harder to pull off successfully ... #LargeMicroplaneWithTeleguided750lbBomb This is for similiar reasons why later model B-17s had twin chin .50 Cals added , to prevent head on attacks from Bf-109s , FW-190s etc .
__________________
Five Gauss Guns on a Camper !!! The Resident Brit . Last edited by Racer; 11-11-2021 at 06:34 PM. |
11-12-2021, 07:25 AM | #96 |
Join Date: Jun 2008
|
Re: Silly Cars
We had one of those in the campaign recently. It had two 4 space cupolas with a single VMG each and cyberlinks. Those controlled two 4 space sponsons each with a linked pair of VMGs on each side and another on the rear via smart links. The firing set up was costly, but the enhanced accuracy meant they could usually hit any target before it got into effective range. At most a 1D bend/drift and they could target into the front arc with ease.
There was provision for 5 additional gunner stations but on this run they were unmanned due to attrition from some corporate wet-work at a truck stop. If I was being cheesy I'd go 4 x linked HMGs with HD ammo per sponson (since weight is not really an issue with trailers). That much crunch will chew through most vehicles in short order. I usually include an extra switchable magazine of explosive ammo just to mess up metal armoured cars, but you can often hit them through the top where there often isn't much metal anyway. It is a rare car that can shrug off 8d6 damage per sponson. I'd also have a switchable mag of tracer for the upper guns for extended range engagements. You can usually pick off even slope armoured motorcycles before their own weapons even get in range with a +3 from sustained fire. It is very hard however to get any sort of useful firepower into the tractor due to the pathetic weight limit and weight of each armour point (and as you probably need a 4000lb plant to pull that sort of trailer). If you are using plasticores (as the tire is always the weak spot) you will have spent half your weight allowance on tires and plant before you even start. |
11-12-2021, 12:17 PM | #97 | |
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: CA
|
Re: Silly Cars
That's the Achilles heel of any big rig - the tractor. It almost makes sense to go with a pure defensive tractor build (with the biggest engine you can fit), and rely on the trailer to kill everything
Quote:
|
|
11-12-2021, 02:48 PM | #98 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Silly Cars
Quote:
One item which would have been nice in _CW Tanks_: Being able to put a 5th-wheel on an armored car, like military HETs.
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
|
11-12-2021, 05:52 PM | #99 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, UK
|
Re: Silly Cars
Quote:
Heavy Duty , HD2 (NOVA AFV Pages) & Giant AFV Power Plants can be used . Or Earth Mover Power Plants (ADQ 10/3) , but that had disadvantage of reducing top speed to 12.5mph when towing a max load . (our Medium Armoured Cars have six armour facings based on fact Mini Buses have six facings on same 35 Spaces . Max load is also increased to 25,000lb . Small Armored Cars had max loads of 12,000 & could tripe cost Car PPs , but couldn't mount Fifth Wheel modifications .)
__________________
Five Gauss Guns on a Camper !!! The Resident Brit . |
|
11-13-2021, 01:03 AM | #100 |
Join Date: Jun 2008
|
Re: Silly Cars
If we are talking about Oversized vehicles, most 10 wheelers are silly.
The tractor max load is probably not far off, but all other 10 wheelers have around the same cost and weight of a tractor, but don't have the rear wheel load capacity to match it. The cost of the chassis is often dwarfed by the cost of the tires. I for 10-wheel trucks, have ruled that the load limit is for the cab ONLY. The carrier load limit is twice this (so you end up with triple the load limit). Then it is worth building them. For reference a Ford LT900 has a GVWR of 61,000lb so I don't think this rule change is implausible. It is also simple to implement. The other change is allowing 6, 10 or 14 wheel variants (as these all exist). In reality these are all to spread the load, so you could peg the carrier capacity on the number of rear axles. You could probably do something similar for the buses as their GVWR also seems to follow the same pattern. Maybe someone in CW land got confused between the empty, payload and the overall weights for these sorts of vehicles. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|