Forums of the Megaverse®

Ammo for Long Range missiles upgrade on the VF-1, If I'm looking at the right missiles (RMS-1 looking ones) doesn't it seem like it should be 6?

in the RPG, a VF-1 has 4 hard points (2 per wing) each able to carry 2000lbs. an LRM is 1000lbs. so by the weights, it could carry 8 total.

in the show we only saw 6 missiles loaded, but it was 2 on the inner hard points and 1 on the outer.

It seems only 6 (which is what is canon going by the show) come in the kit as well. Even looking at the majority of the models, RMS-1 are one to a hard point, each on it's own. http://starshipmodeler.biz/shop/index.c ... rms-1.html The one model with two to hard points has them on the distal hardpoint.

Per the RPG explanation the inner hardpoints can carry 2 Long-Range missiles and the outer ones only a single missile each.

's an issue with the animation of the original Macross series...

The design spec. and animation model sheets for the VF-1 Valkyrie always indicated that the VF-1 Valkyrie only had four pylons, but the animation model sheets didn't show how the VF-1 was supposed to carry that complement of six RMS-1 reaction missiles for Ep27. It wasn't shown up close, so the animators drew the missiles flush to the wing and equidistant from each other. Animation model sheets showing how, in detail, the VF-1 was able to carry two reaction missiles on one pylon weren't available at the time.

Consequentially, Macross generally cheerfully ignores that particular art gaffe in its original series... though it was later halfheartedly explained away as an uncommon alternate wing configuration only suitable for very limited, very specific loadings in Variable Fighter Master File: VF-1 Valkyrie Vol.1 (from whence that image comes).

actually no:


bolding for emphasis is mine. a VF-1 can carry up to 8 LRM's.

I see the book says that, but I've only ever seen 4 to 6 RMS-1s on a VF-1 in any of the animation. And the RRT VF-1 comes with 6 as well. If that's what your going to include in the kit, why not set the ammo at six? I'm not disputing weight, just space and what is actually shown in the show. As well as what comes with and fits on the RRT model.

Did anything ever officially say what a VF-1's skin was made of? Is it hyper carbon like some of the SDF-1?

where do you get hyper-carbon for the SDF-1? the RPG never states what stuff is made of.

Humor me for a moment as someone who didn't back the game... what does it actually say for ammo there in the RRT rulebook? Eight?

(The RPG's definitions of Long-Range Missiles are a bit wonky... the VF-1 actually has long-range missiles which are entirely separate entities from the RMS-1 in Macross sources.)




In Robotech? No. Robotech never gets into the specifics of anything, it just nicks the summary-level stats from OSM sources.

In Macross? IIRC, Variable Fighter Master File identified the armor/skin as being made of a hypercarbon-carbon composite material. The original term used was "spacemetal", but that was given a less Gundam homage-y ("Luna Titanium") name when DYRL came out.





's a material that only exists in Macross... in the movie Macross: Do You Remember Love?, when he and Minmay first get stranded in the bowels of the Macross, Hikaru identifies the bulkhead that cut them off from the rest of the ship as being made of hypercarbon. (The whole ship is supposed to be made of it.)

Wow, you never cease amaze me with all your info.

Yeah, ammo for long range missiles is listed as "ammo 8", ammo for mediums is effectively 12, and 8 x 8 for the Micro-missile pods (which if I ever mount, I'd like to model them instead as UMM-7s not the stock RRT ones, though they look fine). 6 RMS-1 looking missiles come on a sprue. Obviously they're not RMS-1 reaction/reflex warheads in games, because who wants fight the guy that brings enough fire power to wipe out your whole army/side of the map with one Valkyrie on turn one. That being said if you take the Long Range missiles, they are listed as ammo 8, and you have 6 RMS-1s to model that with. I don't think more than 6 would fit well on the wings anyway.

Good call Seto, I always figured the VF-1 would have been made out something over-technology derived, Hyper-Carbon seemed like the natural choice, as it was the only material I remember being mentioned specifically. I was just not sure if anything actually addressed what the VFs were made of. I'll have to pick up the Variable Fighter Master file on the VF-1 one of these days. That one slipped passed me. Yah plum got ta know 'bout yer Hyper-Carbon.



It's hard for me to keep the original Macross and Robotech separated these days. You are quite right, the RPG does not say that. It would however make sense as to why it's MDC in the Megaverse. And since Robotech never says exactly what it's made out of... *shrug* I just default the original Macross. Apollogies if I caused confusion with my mixing of Macrosses.

Odd choices... the RPG's convinced the RMS-1 is a long-range missile, and the VF-1 is only ever shown to carry six. Of course, all bets are off for the "MLOP", since that isn't even supposed to be in the RPG... it's an error brought about by copy-pasting from Macross sources that don't differentiate between DYRL and series versions (because, canonically, there's really no reason to). Shouldn't the MLOP be fifteen in total though?



True... though it's conceivable you could wreak just as much havoc with the actual LRMs mentioned in the Master File, if you gave them the same warheads off the SF-3A's missiles. You'd just have twice as many to play with.



Logistically, I don't think they'd fit at all... or if you could get eight hung on two (or three) pylons, you'd probably be unable to move the VG wing.

I may have been remembering this http://www.macross2.net/m3/sdfmacross/v ... lkyrie.htm

You could also be thinking of RT.com Infopedia Entry for the VF-1 or the 1E RPG entry for the VF-1 (it limited you to 6 LRM or 12 SRM).

I did talk to Wayne today and pointed it out and asked for clarification....

Oh really? I'd be interested to know. I'm thinking 'Ammo 8' was probably just an oversight matching up what the RPG says it can hold against what is shown on the show, and thus comes on the model. Haven't played yet, so no idea if I'll want o use LRMs or if taking it down to ammo 6 would be a big deal... I'm leaning WYSIWYG models over RPG is all.

Received a text from Jeff, it will be 6 missiles not 8 and the points cost may change to 15. I don't think the points cost needs to change, those blast missile are vicious.

Word from Jeff, is good to me.

I don't doubt the missiles are destructive. I am concerned about taking the LRMs just due to the fact that all the pods have missile defense lasers (and I'll have less attempts at getting a missile through), I guess the trade off is when you get one through, it'll be more destructive, vs saturating with medium or micro missiles. I'm just waiting for my buddy to get some pods together, to start trying it out...

I look forward to the FAQ/Errata going up to have such things in a clearly defined and publicly available space on the official Palladium website.

It's a small change, but I'm going to guess it's not going to be the last.

Ah yep.

i don't see what was so wrong about 8 LRM's.. so they don't match the # of supplied missiles.. so what? the game is hardly WYSIWYG..

I respect your opinion. However, I myself like WYSIWYG.

Which is a fine thing to aspire to personally, but isn't a requirement for the game.

And with all the leftover missiles/pods on VT sprues, unless one runs multiple squads with the exact same loadout, it'd be feasible to use the extras from one squad to round out what's missing from the other.

So potential workarounds exist for those so inclined, but if the game is balanced with VT's having 8 LRMs and it's changed to 6, presumably they should be cheaper (or perhaps Mike is right and they were undercosted to start with, but either way, that kind of notification of change should be made clear, not something people have to point to a text message some guy claims to have received on a forum post.

Even if we know that legit, half a year from now it's not going to be a solid answer for a tournament organizer looking to make a call, y'know?

Gotta love rule books that need errata the moment they are released.

I hope the errata is folded into a revised rulebook PDF. Especially if there is a lot of changes and fixes (which it sounds like there might be).

PDF? Keep hoping.....

Seconded

Thanks, will do.