Stationary Turret Mount

Car Wars vehicles can mount a turret on top, or an EWP with a fixed facing.  But what about a fixed-facing top mounted weapon that benefits from top armour like a turret does?  That doesn’t seem unreasonable.  Should this cost money, weigh something, take up space?


6 Responses to “Stationary Turret Mount”

  1. The Thing Says:

    For both turrets and EWPs, the spaces taken up by the weapons are technically outisde the vehicle. Turrets, however, also take up space inside the vehicle (max 2 for standard turrets). Is this because of the rotation mechanism, because the weapons are covered by the top armour? Spaces taken up by STMs should be between zero and two.

    Both turrets and EWPs cost money based on the spaces of weapons one can mount in them. The same should hold for STMs. The difference in cost between equivalent turrets and EWPs is only $500, so aiming in between may be splitting hairs…

    EWPs weigh the same as or more than equivalent turrets (seems extremely odd to me).

    What if a stationary turret mount costs the same as an equivalent EWP, but weighs and takes up spaces like an equivalent turret?

  2. richardbranson Says:

    One other rule option is that a fixed mount does not have the vertical motion of a normal turret, sponson or swivel mount. This means that tires cannot be targeted at point blank range by a top-fixed-mount weapon. Another rule, apposite to this one, would be that all other fixed-mount weapons cannot target turrets point blank.

    Of course, if these restrictions were in place, then charging extra money for top-mounted weapons might be superfluous – the penalties more or less match the benefits.

    See my comment regarding lock-downs re: the general question of prices for fixed-frame weapon mounting.

  3. richardbranson Says:

    …but then of course, if fixed-frame and locked weapons in general cannot target anything specific, then that puts top-mounts at the advantage again, as they are -2 to hit, like turrets.

    Perhaps the easiest resolution is simply this: top-mounted weapons of this kind must be in top-mounted EWPs, with their own EWP armour.

    But then again, if we always chose the simplest solution, we’d be playing the Game of Life, not autoduelling.

  4. richardbranson Says:

    …and finally, it seems that not allowing fixed frame weapons to hit specific targets at ALL is probably too draconian. I think my rule would be:

    fixed/locked front-rear-sides weapons can hit tires and ground level objects only
    (within 1″ of the ground)

    fixed/locked top weapons can hit turrets and turret-level objects only.
    (between 1-2″ off the ground)

    Swivels/sponsons turrets have a 60 degree vertical arc (30 degrees up and 30 down), meaning they can target half as high as they are far away from the target (and in practice we’ll say they can always target tires AND turrets)

  5. richardbranson Says:

    My final decision:

    With the restrictions on targeting for both top-mounted and otherwise mounted fixed weapons, it seems fair that they cost no more than standard weapons. Not being able to target tires seems a fair tradeoff for being at -2 to hit. The extra top armour that would be needed to protect that weapon alone seems enough of a cost/weight.

  6. richardbranson Says:

    …and I spose the heights would actually be more like up to 0.75″ for lower level fixed frame weapons and up to 1.5″ for top-mounted fixed weapons.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: