You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Play nice. (This means you.)
Logins from the previous forum have been carried over; if you have difficulty logging in, please try resetting your password before contacting us. Attachments did not survive the migration--many apologies, but we're lucky we kept what we could!
mj12games.com/forum → Defiance → The Army Builder Question Thread!
I have a potentially silly question..........
Is the max PV for weapons by model type (SI, PI, VE) the max PV per weapon frame (ie: each weapon) or is it the max weapon PV per model ??
me am konfoozed and it does make a giganormous difference.
thank you,
jim a.
Is the max PV for weapons by model type (SI, PI, VE) the max PV per weapon frame (ie: each weapon) or is it the max weapon PV per model ??
Per frame. In other words a PI trooper in an army list with a max PI weapon cost of 60 PV could carry a 60 PV rifle in addition to a 5 PV grenade and a 15 PV augmentation.
Make sense?
domo areegato gozimas, senor !!!!
that's what i thought and hoped the answer would be.
Hmmm... let me jump in for a moment. Can you have, for instance, four sub-frames combo'd together, with a couple being tandem and a couple being parallel? Or three frames with two being parallel and one being tandem? Then we'd have to define which of the first two the third one's tandem with, wouldn't we? And that would change the costing formula for having combo frames.
For instance, if I have Subframe 1 (12 PV), Subframe 2 (8 PV), and Subframe 3 (10 PV), and I combine 1 and 2 in a tandem combo, it costs 12+(8*.25), or 14. Now if I want to set up Subframe 3 in a parallel config, do I need to use the PV for Subframe 1 or 2 as the comparator? Or the combined combo PV for 1 & 2 put together?
Or, if I have an assault rifle with an underslung grenade launcher/flamethrower (a subframe with a tandem relationship to two subframes with a parallel relationship), how do I calculate that? Establish the parallel relationship first and then add in the tandem relationship?
I'm working on the Excel customizer again (finally!!) and this is presenting an interesting exercise in logic. One problem is forcing the user to account for what they are trying to do by combo'ing their weapons in the proper order.
when writing up the infranite assault rifle with the underslung 1-shot rocket launcher i did the following:
the assault and long range rounds were parallel with each other (in the original game they would have been tandem). the RL was tandem with the rifle (using the final cost of the rifle). i also made a version with the rifle rounds as tandem and the RL was parallel with the rifle. i also made a three slot parallel weapon, but that's not relevant to your question.
can you tell that my infranite list is still a work in progress ??
oooh, i gotta question......
can i use one frame to represent several models that have different weapon options (the weapons aren't actually the question). i'm basically wanting to use one set of stats for clone, snow and storm troopers, each will have different weapon options.
i'll have four different morale levels of "troopers", three different morale levels of "arc troopers" and six or seven different weapon frames. no "scout troopers" cause i don't have any figures.
If I understand the question right, the answer is "no". You can't have multiple frames that have the same SZ, QU, AR, FS and DC in one army, even if you count them as separate frames against Frame Rating.
That said, I personally wouldn't be adverse to allowing a force to "overload" a frame with more than 4 weapon options if it then would count as multiple frames against FR (1 per every starting 4 weapon options). If the "overloaded" frame was then listed as multiple frames, that would be okay by me too. As I don't think it would actually break the system, I'd allow it as a house rule.
I think I'll let Demian answer javelin98's combo weapon question. It's just one day until my vacation starts and I'm pretty I won't manage complex calculations at this stage of the "yearly cycle" :wink:
ummm no.
i meant that one frame/stat line would be used for several models because their stat line is identical. the only thing that's different is the figure. and the weapons allowed, but each "set" of weapons would not exceed the maximums....although i'll probably "borrow" your idea about using at least an extra frame slot to account for the extra weapon sets.
i thought that the limit on the number of "frames" was to limit the "stat lines" available for infantry and/or weapons, not to limit the number of miniatures that can be used.
that last sentence is not meant to be snarky, but it probably reads that way. and i can't figure out how to say it differently without losing what i mean out of it.
jim a.
As written, the rame rules do not allow for the use of identical frames with different weapon choices. I do not, however, think that this would at all break the system or go against the spirit of the frame restriction rules, assuming only a few frames are affected. I think maybe a quick addendum stating that "plaers may always duplicate a frame for purposes of increasing weapon choices, but each frame so duplicated counts towards the total number of frames of the army in question."
With regards to the combo weapons, I think that, as long as you move from highest priced frame to lowest price frame, you can do any mix of parallel and tandem sub-frames that you would want. Keep in mind, however, that the pricing assumes tandem frames will take a fire action to go to *and* to move away from, i.e. you couldn't start the game wth your (cheaper) tandem round just to move to a parallel round without wasting a turn...make sense?
I'll plan that both of the above will be made clarifications in the new supplement.
thanks
and just so i'm clear: if you have a weapon with a one-shot frame that's a tandem combo with another frame and you fire the one-shot it will still take a fire action to switch to the other frame ???
and just so i'm clear: if you have a weapon with a one-shot frame that's a tandem combo with another frame and you fire the one-shot it will still take a fire action to switch to the other frame ???
You are correct. It takes a turn to shift to a new frame.
In "real life", this represents using the same barrell for different rounds, i.e. the need to physically shift between feeds.
A modern over/under GL design would be parallel, not tandem.
Like in Shadowrun, where you take a mag full of APDS and a mag full of Explosive rounds 
You have the perfect ammo for armoured opponents, and the perfect ammo for unarmoured opponents, but you have to change mags and clear the chamber every time you switch.
i used to just alternate rounds in the same magazine
APDS, EX, APDS, EX, etc.
oh, and thanks for the confirmation Demian. it's nice to know that i didn't completely misunderstand the rules(self-directed sarcasm :oops: ).
i used to just alternate rounds in the same magazine
APDS, EX, APDS, EX, etc.
Then you would have been paying extra points for parallel capability.
TRUE
speaking off infranites......
how would one build a long range smoke launcher?
Good question. In theory, it will require playtesting more than any mathematical formulae, though its cost would still vary statistically by the weapon frame attributes used to shoot the smoke grenade. My gut says price it the same as a 9+ AOE template of the same size for -1 LOS and a 7+ AOE template for -2 LOS. It would have the same tabletop duration as a smoke grenade.
Let me know if you try this out.
i tried this for the chain cannon.
HEAP.....VE...AV...1U...15/30/45/60/--...n/a.....1....n/a...un....65pv
Flech.....VE...AI... 4A...--/--/20/30/40....n/a.....-.....n/a...un....44pv
HE.........VE...AI...1.....15/30/45/60/--...3",9+..-.....n/a....6.....34pv
Smoke...VE...AI...1.....15/30/45/60/--...4",7+..-.....n/a....6.....68pv
these pv costs are before parallel combo modifications(all 4 parallel), so i end up with a final cost of 150pv. maybe knock 50% off the cost of the smoke round cause it does NO damage??
it just seems wrong that the smoke round is so expensive. i thought about just purchasing a "launcher" and adding the cost of whatever type of smoke grenade it acts like onto it. multiplying the grenade cost by the "launcher" FR.like this:
Smoke...VE...AI...2...--/15/30/45/60...3" pers....n/a...n/a...un...42pv
the launcher is 30pv. 3" persistent smoke grenade X FR2 is 12pv.
I like your idea alot, since the ability to "throw" the grenades much farther than infantry could is already taken into account by the frame cost.
I would say give this a try and if it seems to wrk, we'll place it in the supplement as an add-on rule.
Cheers,
Demian
okay
So, if I make a rifle with two ammo types in seperate mags (tandem) and a 1-shot parallel (over or under slung GL or rocket), is the parallel considered to be parallel to BOTH tandem types or only one, and then must that one be the primary?
The Infranite Assault rifle as described in Legiond of Steel has a mag of Long Range ammo, a mag of Short Range Ammo, and a one-shot rocket. The Long Range would be the most expensive. If I spend a fire action switching to Short Range ammo must I them spend a fire action switching back before I can use the parallel rocket?
i figured the cost of the rocket compared to the combined cost of the rifle. the rifle has two tandem slots and the rocket (or the war leader/chief's GL) is parallel to the rifle.
i've also just thought about having a three slot parallel combo for it. you know, due to weapon design advances and stuff.
or just "average" the long and short range rounds for the rifle so that it will only be a two slot weapon (including the RL or GL).
Jim: I'm considering dropping the assault rounds altogether. I'd rationalise that they are an extra ammo type issued when a unit is going into the tunnels . If I keep them, it will be as parallel I think, to prevent them being completely useless. Even then I don't see them being standard, they're just not a big enough advantage.
aaahh !!!
but you see, i made them FR 3.
Question:
Does the maximum HTH Rating cost include the Reflex cost ???
Or is it just the HTH Rating cost ???
Thank You,
Jim A.
Another Question:
Is it possible/permissable to place a "weapon link" (infantry unit augmentation) on a vehicle weapon ???
I'm trying to figure out how to design a Volcano FROG BAP for the Infranites. The problem is that it has four linked FROG pods, a Chain Cannon and a vehicular CDW.
My idea was to put two FROG pods (each with a weapon link) in one "fire action" and the Cannon and CDW in the other.
For those that don't know, the Volcano is an Anime Mecha.
I'm asking this because it just seems silly that i would have to create two versions of the FROG pod. One for infantry (single pod) and the other for the Volcano (quad pod). If i could create a FR 4 template weapon with 4 shots (16 total) that i didn't have to fire at full FR so i could conserve ammo.....i wouldn't be asking this question.
I'd be asking for a much higher max vehicle weapon cost 
thanks again,
jim a.
For the Volcano FROG, as well as just going with PI rather than Vehicle (because I got a stack of BAPs) I made the "FROG Rack" a different weapon than the FROG Pod. I kept the same AOE (4") but improved the kill number (from 9+ to 5+) and gave it an Impact Rating of One. That takes it from a 1/5 kill to a 1/2 kill with a good chance of taking out 2-kill figures. With Indirect Fire ability and 4 ammo it's a mere 53 points.
Add a Covering Computer augmentation and that makes the Chain Cannon useful even before the FROG ammo runs out; and remember the CDW effectively gets its own fire action if I read the rule correctly. IE you can let off a CDW at any time for free but only once per turn.
You could also play the Anime rules variant and give the Volcano FROG a "portable airstrike"
I think all things considered that designing a second weapon type is the best and simplest way to do it. It's just one weapon type.
mj12games.com/forum → Defiance → The Army Builder Question Thread!
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.