Re: [Epic] Titan weapon slots

From: Aaron P Teske <Mithramuse+_at_...>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 01:12:10 -0500 (EST)

Excerpts from Epic: 20-Feb-97 RE: [Epic] Titan weapon slots by John_at_...
> >> In the orignal rules titans could mount more than two weapons on the
> >> carapace.
> >
> >Wrong. Adeptus Titanicus manual, page 35: "Each Titan has four weapon
> >mounts: Right Arm, Left Arm, Right Carapace and Left Carapace."
>
> Umm I do beg to differ. Yes the manual state each titan has four weapon
> mounts, RA,LA,RC,LC....yet it also states that each of those four mounts
> carries four (if I remember) hard points. With CC weapons being
3hrdpnts and > heavy weapons being 2hrdpnts. (i.e. two heavy weapons
per location) I would
> consider more than one weapon per mounting location to be more than a
> potential two weapons on the carapace.

Close, but not quite. Each hard point used (CC weapons were 2 points,
and only one CC weapon per arm slot; heavy weapons were 1 point, and
very heavy weapons 3 points) gave you one or two shots from a gun. For
example, one hard point worth of Plasma Gun got you one shot, therefore
to get today's Plasma Cannon effect of four shots means you've have to
fill all four hard points with Plasma Guns.

So, if you want to take a Volcano Cannon (V.heavy weapon) and attach a
Vulcan Mega-Bolter to the last hard point today, your VMB would have
(IMO) only two shots. (Since, IMO, the "fixed" version of the VMB gets
two shots per hard point.)

So you can potentially mount more that two weapon types, but the
effectiveness of each is reduced.

[snip]
> >> If the positioning bothers you... consider the Warp and Harpoon
> >Missile bits. > These were clearly made to mount under not on the
> >carapace. Now some whiners > out there say that its wrong (blah blah
> >blah) since new rules say missiles
> >> are carapace (on) mount only. I don't think so.
> >
> >New rules? Hardly. Adeptus Titanicus, page 36: "Support missiles may
> >only be mounted on the carapace of a Titan." And don't try to say that
> >the arms are the carapace; AT makes a very clear distinction between the
> >arm and carapace mounts. Support missiles have *never* been allowed on
> >the arms; that's just something that they left out in the transition
> >from AT to Space Marine
>
> I was not referring to the rules on this. I believe I made a specific
> reference to mini itself.

Pardon? Re-read the quoted paragraph above, please, noting the words
"...since new rules say...." And while you did reference how the bits
"were clearly made to mount under not on the carapace," that's not
really that mini-specific.

>The warp missile when mounted on the
> carapace is upside down.

See my comment immediately below.

> >All the orientation of the Imperial Eagles means is that the game
> >designers didn't communicate with the artists very well.
>
> get real ,.... What about assault troops & jump packs. Marines cannot
depart > from Thawk with jump packs - Most artwork of that nature shows
such a
> departure.

Thank you, my point exactly. You *cannot* use artwork -- not even the
bits -- as a guide for what you can do in the game.

>Hasn't the CJ released an orky detachment card which now allows
> blood axe troops with jump/rocket packs to leap from a Thawk?? Explain.

Dunno, I tend to ignore CJ. While they're usually amusing, and
occationally come up with some good ideas, most of their stuff is
horribly overpowered for the price. (Both in game terms and actual
terms -- one CJ issue costs more than a WD and gives you rather less,
even if you play all of GW's games....)

                    Aaron Teske
                    Mithramuse+_at_...
Received on Fri Feb 21 1997 - 06:12:10 UTC