Author Topic: Aerospace PV calculation Inconsistencies.  (Read 906 times)

Thunder

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 242
Aerospace PV calculation Inconsistencies.
« on: 03 May 2024, 21:49:01 »
2 Issues

First.
Booby Traps on Aerospace.  In the book (pg. 143 AS:C) it says their value is: Size*Highest Move*.5
This is the same formula as for ground units, but gives different valuations.  For a ground unit PV=damage.  For an aerospace unit PV=Damage*Move/2 (What happens if the Move is less then 2?  Which happens with Airships.)

Would it be convenient to errata Booby Traps PV to just be equal to their damage?   Since this is what the MUL and Megamek are already doing, and it seems easier to change a seldom used rule to match whats already happening then to update the software.

Also it does affect 1 real unit which is technically incorrectly valued in the MUL.  The Bullet Suicide Drone should cost 2 more points, Or its fine if the rule is updated.



Second.
Is it the intention for a Dropship armed with 80 Cruise Missile-120 systems to have a PV of... 9?
This is caused by the lack of reference to Offensive Special Abilities in the Large Aerospace Craft section (pg 144).  This does affect real units like the Fortress which gets to deploy a free Long Tom.

PS.  The Offensive Special Ability Table (Aerospace Units) (Pg 143) may need to be updated for ART PV value.  I'd just port over the Ground unit values since these systems tend to need to be used by landed units anyways.

Pretending I didn't just ask a rhetorical question...  I dont think 9PV is right.  I think it should be changed to create a more accurate and robust set of rules that doesn't have an obvious exploit built it.  Even though it will cause all the work I wanted to avoid with my first concern.  Game is better for this change, so its worth it.

 

Register