Author Topic: So, they have a RL, but not a (S)RL? Hmm. (Read 2708 times)

Red Pins · « **on:** 21 January 2020, 17:24:51 »

I was out shoveling at work thinking about Chris' use of RLs on conventional fighters in his story, "This would be easier on tabletop", wondering what else I could do with them for one of my projects and if it would be worth it to mount a MML, instead.

Then, it occurred to me, why not make a RL that used SRMs? So, for the same weight, we get a 5-tube (Short range) Rocket Launcher for the same mass for a RL-10. Same deal for RL-20, making a (S)RL-10.

What do you think?

Daryk · « **Reply #1 on:** 21 January 2020, 21:00:11 »

You mean change the 5-point groups to more 2-point groups? Rules-wise, it seems workable...

Red Pins · « **Reply #2 on:** 21 January 2020, 21:56:45 »

Since the missiles mass the same, it seems like it would be fairly easy.

Also, next evil thought; 5 tandem-charge missiles for .25 tons, on a civilian vehicle with the hidden weapon quirk. Perfect for my next project.

Daryk · « **Reply #3 on:** 22 January 2020, 04:18:19 »

Why cut the weight in half? Half a ton works for 5 SRMs...

dgorsman · « **Reply #4 on:** 22 January 2020, 10:23:09 »

Meh. I'd settle for being able to use individual Thunderbolt missiles like Zuni rockets.

Daryk · « **Reply #5 on:** 22 January 2020, 16:28:11 »

A half a ton for a single Thunderbolt-5 would be reasonable, I think. The problems would really come in at the 15 and 20...

EDIT: darn keyboard... haven't rinsed all the sugar out of it yet...

Red Pins · « **Reply #6 on:** 22 January 2020, 18:27:58 »

Quote from: Daryk on 22 January 2020, 04:18:19

Why cut the weight in half? Half a ton works for 5 SRMs...

Oh, heck. Sorry, yes, .5 tons.

Quote from: dgorsman on 22 January 2020, 10:23:09

Meh. I'd settle for being able to use individual Thunderbolt missiles like Zuni rockets.

Yeah, I do that, too. Naval cap missiles on twin-engine, 200 ton FighterShips, T-bolts with conventional fighters, but those are all home rules.

RifleMech · « **Reply #7 on:** 24 January 2020, 04:10:24 »

Are you asking for Heavy Rockets (Twice Damage) and Long Range Rockets (Twice Range) both with reduced number of rockets per launcher? 5/7/10 instead of 10/15/20? If yes, cool idea. :thumbsup:

Are you also wanting specialty Rockets? If yes, also cool idea. :thumbsup: I'd limit some to Heavy rockets though.

Quote from: dgorsman on 22 January 2020, 10:23:09

Meh. I'd settle for being able to use individual Thunderbolt missiles like Zuni rockets.

I still use the Prototype Thunderbolts from Unbound.

Red Pins · « **Reply #8 on:** 24 January 2020, 18:15:02 »

Quote from: RifleMech on 24 January 2020, 04:10:24

Are you asking for Heavy Rockets (Twice Damage) and Long Range Rockets (Twice Range) both with reduced number of rockets per launcher? 5/7/10 instead of 10/15/20? If yes, cool idea. :thumbsup:

Are you also wanting specialty Rockets? If yes, also cool idea. :thumbsup: I'd limit some to Heavy rockets though.

I still use the Prototype Thunderbolts from Unbound.

Just substituting 5 SRMs for 10 LRMs from the RL-10, and 10 SRMs for the 10 LRMs of the RL-20. I wasn't going to mess with the RL-15 since the rockets don't match up evenly.

I normally allow specialty ammo in launchers anyway, so yes here as well.

*When you say heavy rockets, you mean SRMs, right? You know, ER-LRMs might work here too - I'll have to check.

Daryk · « **Reply #9 on:** 24 January 2020, 18:58:23 »

I'm much less sure of trading an RL-20 for 10 SRMs... those are VERY different things.

RifleMech · « **Reply #10 on:** 25 January 2020, 02:24:53 »

Quote from: Red Pins on 24 January 2020, 18:15:02

Just substituting 5 SRMs for 10 LRMs from the RL-10, and 10 SRMs for the 10 LRMs of the RL-20. I wasn't going to mess with the RL-15 since the rockets don't match up evenly.

I normally allow specialty ammo in launchers anyway, so yes here as well.

*When you say heavy rockets, you mean SRMs, right? You know, ER-LRMs might work here too - I'll have to check.

Yeah. I called them Rockets since Missiles Launchers are heavier and have better targeting.

I like using specialty ammo so I can see Rockets having some. Problem is getting range and damage right.

I don't mind that there'd only be 7 Rockets. I don't think things always need to divide evenly.

Red Pins · « **Reply #11 on:** 25 January 2020, 09:01:37 »

I kinda figure the -5 and -10 would be most popular the same way the RL-10 is. Because math.

RifleMech · « **Reply #12 on:** 25 January 2020, 10:18:35 »

Quote from: Red Pins on 25 January 2020, 09:01:37

I kinda figure the -5 and -10 would be most popular the same way the RL-10 is. Because math.

Probably. But if I can get 4 points of damage for that .5 tons I'll do it.

Red Pins · « **Reply #13 on:** 25 January 2020, 19:38:38 »

True.

Hmm. Wonder what an (E)DO would look like. Might have to sit down tonight after my wife and kids go down for the night and look at it.

RifleMech · « **Reply #14 on:** 26 January 2020, 12:47:27 »

(E)DO???

Red Pins · « **Reply #15 on:** 26 January 2020, 22:08:21 »

Typo. Stupid typo, should have been (E)RL-whatever (Extended-range Rocket launcher)

RifleMech · « **Reply #16 on:** 27 January 2020, 06:23:52 »

Quote from: Red Pins on 26 January 2020, 22:08:21

Typo. Stupid typo, should have been (E)RL-whatever (Extended-range Rocket launcher)

Ah. Hate those. Extended Range Rockets would be cool.

Wolf72 · « **Reply #17 on:** 03 February 2020, 20:22:50 »

more fuel for the fire!

I was thinking an improved RL or i-RL: Still .5 ton, but with less rockets corkscrewing around there is no hit penalty. Also would bump the range to 19 (it's 'improved'!) which would give it long range for ASF's. That's as far as I'd go on 'improved' though.

And I'd want a RL-torpedo, too. keep it at .5 ton, but make it a single 3 point torpedo with 19 hex range ... even the +1 hit penalty for simplified electronics and what not.

Red Pins · « **Reply #18 on:** 03 February 2020, 23:24:31 »

I guess I'll look at this tonight, it's been kinda nagging me.

Red Pins · « **Reply #19 on:** 04 February 2020, 00:47:05 »

Ok, I'm getting old. And tired. After all the math and percentages and ratios, I didn't see any obvious fixes.

I'm going to go out on a limb, and claim that the RL-15 is cut down to a (E)RL-12 since there needs to be a larger, more robust launcher and larger missiles.

Because larger RLs loose effective range (fluff says cluttered flight path), a smaller rack of (E)RLs should lose range at roughly that ratio. Since the RL loses 3 hexes compared to a LRM launcher of the roughly the same size (about 14%) the (E)RL should lose about 6 hexes, making ranges equal 10/10/22/34 at that percentage.

SO; 1 ton, 1 crit, (E)LRM-12 - Min 10,10/22/34

Any comments? And anybody want to take a swing at torpedos?

RifleMech · « **Reply #20 on:** 04 February 2020, 01:18:49 »

Quote from: Wolf72 on 03 February 2020, 20:22:50

more fuel for the fire!

I was thinking an improved RL or i-RL: Still .5 ton, but with less rockets corkscrewing around there is no hit penalty. Also would bump the range to 19 (it's 'improved'!) which would give it long range for ASF's. That's as far as I'd go on 'improved' though.

And I'd want a RL-torpedo, too. keep it at .5 ton, but make it a single 3 point torpedo with 19 hex range ... even the +1 hit penalty for simplified electronics and what not.

Aren't Improved Rockets called Missiles? I would give a RL-7 longer range though. Probably that of LRMs with a +1 to strike.

Wouldn't it be easier to have a torpedo version of the of Thunderbolt Missiles?

I would love to have Hedgehogs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedgehog_(weapon)