Role for Non-PWS Assault Dropships

[Colt Ward]

Air drop supplies?  Do you want to re-enact the scene from A Bridge Too Far?

[Giovanni Blasini]

It's just shorthand. People aren't saying that it weighs ten tons, they're saying it takes up ten tons in the cargo bay, because the rules for the quirk are 1 bomb spot = 1 ton of cargo space needed to drop/launch it.

So, wait, do we have two different types of bomb bays being treated differently?  Because based on the stuff I posted here it looks like LAM bomb bays can carry one ton of bomb per ton of bomb bay, not one slot of bomb, which is where you get the long-standing assumption that the WSP-100’s 5-ton bomb bay can carry an Arrow IV munition. 

[Weirdo]

It still tracks. A 5-ton bomb bay can carry a 5-slot Arrow missile.

Also, yes. The dedicated internal bomb bay of a LAM and the cargo bay of a DropShip being used as an ad-hoc bomb bay are two completely different pieces of equipment.

[Daryk]

It's just shorthand. People aren't saying that it weighs ten tons, they're saying it takes up ten tons in the cargo bay, because the rules for the quirk are 1 bomb spot = 1 ton of cargo space needed to drop/launch it.

I thought the quirk was published prior to IO, meaning IO trumps?

[Weirdo]

You have me totally confused. IO doesn't have quirks rules, aside from at the SBF level.

[Daryk]

The citation of IO page 175 on the previous page of this thread explicitly says an Alamo only takes up 5 tons in an internal bay.  The Internal Bomb Bay quirk was published in an earlier book.

[Weirdo]

That...is weird as pants. My advice would be to ask in the Rules Forum, because I can't resolve that.

[Maingunnery]

Personally I am hoping that LAM internal bays use weight as the primary factor as that is easier and less of a RAW deal that they already have.

[Daryk]

The 5-ton weight of the Alamo seems to be a Rules as Written thing to me.  It doesn't look remotely ambiguous.  If it really needs head canon, think of them as being more volume than "normal" bombs, thus taking up more room as external stores.  Internal bomb bays have indeterminate volume (and I think we want it stay that way).

[Liam's Ghost]

I feel like the massive amounts of space and weight an alamo takes up was an attempt to "balance" something that was never going to be balanced. I mean, it's a nuclear warhead. At best you might be able to bring it to the table in a naval engagement (against capital units) without breaking the whole thing.

Anybody else? nah. It's such a "pour gasoline on the map" item that the balance thing should have been "only if everybody agrees" and leave it at that.

[Daryk]

It's the sort of "last resort" that should be expected when facing Taurians (or the "more Taurain than Taurians" the Lothians were supposed to be).

[Maingunnery]

Nukes are definitely something meant for mutual consent and mutual usage.

[Daryk]

Or the kind of thing a GM brings when trying to discourage the PCs from a REALLY bad idea...

[Giovanni Blasini]

I feel like the massive amounts of space and weight an alamo takes up was an attempt to "balance" something that was never going to be balanced. I mean, it's a nuclear warhead. At best you might be able to bring it to the table in a naval engagement (against capital units) without breaking the whole thing.

Anybody else? nah. It's such a "pour gasoline on the map" item that the balance thing should have been "only if everybody agrees" and leave it at that.

It has bearing on more than just Alamos, though.  Air-Launched Arrow missiles, including Air-to-Air Arrows, are 1 ton but 5 bomb slots.   Anti-Ship Missiles are 2 tons but six slots. 

[Maingunnery]

It has bearing on more than just Alamos, though.  Air-Launched Arrow missiles, including Air-to-Air Arrows, are 1 ton but 5 bomb slots.   Anti-Ship Missiles are 2 tons but six slots.

Exactly, those are some of the reasons that I hope that LAMs can do it by weight.

[Jellico]

I feel like the massive amounts of space and weight an alamo takes up was an attempt to "balance" something that was never going to be balanced. I mean, it's a nuclear warhead. At best you might be able to bring it to the table in a naval engagement (against capital units) without breaking the whole thing.

Anybody else? nah. It's such a "pour gasoline on the map" item that the balance thing should have been "only if everybody agrees" and leave it at that.

An Alamo's bomb slots are so you can't spam them on fighters under 50 tons. Only a hundred ton fighter can carry two.

As for LAMs. It is pretty clear no one wants them carrying bombs. Why add nukes?

[Daryk]

If no one wants them carrying bombs, why was the bomb bay installed in the Wasp? 

[Wrangler]

the bomb bays can be used to hold other things. Like extra fuel.

[Jellico]

If no one wants them carrying bombs, why was the bomb bay installed in the Wasp? 

Okay. I will rephrase that. ASF can carry bombs externally over and above the maximum weight limit of the airframe.

LAMs need to dedicate tons to carry a bomb and make use of the bomb bay quirk.

Bombs are essentially free for an ASF but come at a significant cost for LAMs.

[Daryk]

I think LAM Bomb Bays are actual equipment independent of the quirk.  The quirk is for other units that can't mount a "LAM" bomb bay.  The IO page 175 reference refers to "internal" bomb bays which encompasses both.

[Wrangler]

I think LAM Bomb Bays are actual equipment independent of the quirk.  The quirk is for other units that can't mount a "LAM" bomb bay.  The IO page 175 reference refers to "internal" bomb bays which encompasses both.

That's how i read into it.  They're always internal bay. It's not suppose have negative effects since it's not externally mounted. Then again, my memory of the rules is fading.