l0rDn0o8sKiLlZ
01/11/20 02:26 PM
73.216.131.208
|
- Can I legally mount a weapon in a turret as rear-facing? So if my main gun is pointed at the enemy, the other gun which is rear facing would be facing 180 degrees away.
"Woad Raider, kill things today."
|
ghostrider
01/11/20 08:37 PM
66.74.60.165
|
Is this in a fighter or drop ship?
In the original 3025 TRO, the Slayer fighter is said to have a medium laser in a rear turret. No equip is listed for the turret itself, so there is a small conflict here. There is also one on the Leopard dropship as well.
I want to ask why a turret is needed for the rear? With the exception of trying to rotate it towards the front, it covers the rear arc.
|
Karagin
01/12/20 12:17 AM
72.176.171.47
|
There are no rules for this if a weapon is in a turret, then it's in the turret.
The turret has no additional things like you want. I get what you are saying, a tank could have a laser or MG in the rear of the main turret, now you could claim that is a secondary turret and follow those rules for vehicles, but nothing is like this for Aerospace units.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Frabby
01/12/20 02:50 AM
91.39.164.192
|
There are numerous turrets in the art that don't reflect in boardgame rules. The Wolverine's double-barreled chin turret is another that springs to mind.
Art aside, the OP is asking a fascinating rules question.
Technically, turrets don't have a rear facing (nor do buildings have one). Building turrets also follow different construction rules from vehicle or 'Mech turrets.
I thus expect the answer to be No - but for an official answer you'd have to post your question in the appropriate section over at the official bg.battletech.com forum.
|
Karagin
01/12/20 12:30 PM
72.176.171.47
|
Or come up with a house rule and let us see the idea, who knows maybe some of us can use it in our games and if enough people get to use them it could become like other things folks did back in the day, add it in and roll with it, like putting dice next to miniatures for movement mods and the floating critical idea etc....
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
01/12/20 12:52 PM
66.74.60.165
|
It is considered a blister? Such as drophips using them to allow their weapons to fire in their arc? Or a half turret?
I would think you could, but it wouldn't be worth it, as a turret give you all arc firing capability. To waste the tonnage on a single arc seems to be a complete waste. A house rule or even just using it to fire in the rear is possible. Weapons on a fighter fire in the entire arc they are mounted in.
And the turret on the Slayer is in the fluff. I think that was before the turret came out for building vehicles.
To clarify the statement of buildings. The turret has no arc facing limitations. The sides do.
|
l0rDn0o8sKiLlZ
01/12/20 02:53 PM
73.216.131.208
|
No, more like the (admittedly awful) Japanese tanks of World War 2, with a machinegun at a rear (or sideways) angle. Turrets don't have separate arcs AFAIK, rather they are just the 360 degree arc of the vehicle they are mounted to. I think I'm going to homerule them as have front, left, right and rear arcs with all weapons mounted in them being assumed as a front facing weapon unless otherwise noted.
"Woad Raider, kill things today."
|
ghostrider
01/12/20 06:44 PM
66.74.60.165
|
Were you talking about ball turrets? Those are the ones that the MGs of tanks were set in, so the whole unit didn't have to move in order to fire in the entire are the mg was placed at.
The description of weapons and their arcs on fighters, as well as warships, would suggest their weapons reside in that type of turret. The ship doesn't change facing in order to fire weapons within the arc, and a stationary weapon couldn't even attempt it.
|
Karagin
01/13/20 10:25 AM
72.176.171.47
|
Quote:
Were you talking about ball turrets? Those are the ones that the MGs of tanks were set in, so the whole unit didn't have to move in order to fire in the entire are the mg was placed at.
Picture this, you have a tank turret, it has the main gun in front and in the rear of the turret is a second gun like a MG. It has no ball joint or anything, it's just sticking out the back of the turret. See link below to the picture:
[image]https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/jap/Type_1_Chi-He.php[/image]
And the link:
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/jap/Type_1_Chi-He.php
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
ghostrider
01/13/20 12:46 PM
66.74.60.165
|
I get it now. I thought he wanted something that was in the rear of the tank, not facing rear in the main turret.
Check out the Von Luckner tank. It has 1 srm 6 pack on each side of the main gun, but they face in opposite arcs. So when facing forward, one fires left and one fires right.
Given this is a canon tank, I don't see why you couldn't make a tank with the mg facing a different direction from the main gun(s).
Interesting. The wiki says nothing about the 6 packs facing other directions, yet it is in the TRO 3025. Wonder if the developers dropped that feature, or if it is just an omission.
Edited by ghostrider (01/13/20 12:50 PM)
|
Karagin
01/13/20 02:14 PM
72.176.171.47
|
The side-mounted weapons CAN fire into the forward arc, look at any of the rule books, they will show you the diagram for this.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
l0rDn0o8sKiLlZ
01/13/20 04:28 PM
73.216.131.208
|
Wait, but then what is the point of the Sponson Turrets?
"Woad Raider, kill things today."
|
ghostrider
01/13/20 05:01 PM
66.74.60.165
|
I thought the side weapons can only fire in the left/right arcs unless the turret is moved to another facing. For the Von Luckner anyways. It was one of the odd things about the Von Luckner that didn't make sense.
I do agree with l0rDn0o8sKiLlZ. I thought the sponson turrets were the only ones that could fire in side or forward arc with the tank and turret facing the same direction. . Like a mini turret, limited in how far they can turn.
Unless they changed firing arcs so they are more like mechs. Not sure with the newer rules.
Unless you are talking about the one hex row that they share on the edges of their firing arcs.
|
Karagin
01/13/20 08:13 PM
72.176.171.47
|
Quote:
Unless you are talking about the one hex row that they share on the edges of their firing arcs.
Yes, since that how it always been, they share a row, thus can fire into the forward arc. Never said it was the best idea or rule, but it's there.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Karagin
01/13/20 08:14 PM
72.176.171.47
|
Quote:
Wait, but then what is the point of the Sponson Turrets?
To build WW1 style vehicles or to copy WH40K style stuff...aka conversion.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
l0rDn0o8sKiLlZ
01/14/20 12:32 AM
73.216.131.208
|
So if I mount an LRM-5 in a tank on the left side, with a left sided facing, it can fire in front of the tank too? What about into the rear?
I always assumed the firing arcs for weapons mounted to the left or right side of the body couldn't shoot directly fore or aft of the vehicle, and hence the sponsons would allow this at the cost of extra weight and crits.
Why have them take up space if they're functionally superfluous?
"Woad Raider, kill things today."
|
ghostrider
01/14/20 03:30 AM
66.74.60.165
|
A side weapon does NOT fire straight forward/backward. It fires in the extreme edge of the arc.
The one point where front and side meet in one row. Same with the back.
So you have 45 degrees on each side of straight out of the portion of the vehicle the weapon sits in.
|
Karagin
01/14/20 08:34 AM
72.176.171.47
|
As Ghostrider said, you have limited ability to fire forwards and rearward from side-mounted weapons. You are pointing out one of the numerous issues with the vehicles and how things work on them.
Sponsons give you an advantage, but their weight and such don't make up for their cost, etc. Now could something similar be done for a rear face weapon on a vehicle in the turret? Sure, it could, did they consider that when they were revamping things, nope clearly they didn't or they went with the idea that no one would want to put weapons in the rear of a turret cause then you get complex about things and make the vehicles need better armor tables and less of a two to three turn item.
It also brings up the issue with wanting door gunners on VTOLs or side-mounted weapons on said same, like VTOL gunship akin to the Huey Cobra or the Hind or Apache.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|