Page 1 of 1

Warhawk

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 10:31 pm
by DarkWolf
Based off the game Warhawk, this is my latest creation, and one of my more deadly ones.

Warhawk

Cost: 75
Size: Flight: 12”
Size: Hover: 10”
Propulsion: Flight: min; 36” max; 60”
Propulsion: Hover: min; 0” max; 36”
Armor: 3d10
Note: Can switch between hover and flight mode. Switching takes one turn and uses the action for that turn
Weapons: Mk. III Dual Linked Machineguns, Mk. II Tark Missiles (x4)

Mk. III Dual Linked Machineguns
Cost: 15
Range: 20”
UR: 6
Damage: 3d6
Notes: Fires ten shots total

Mk. II Tark Missiles
Cost: 10
Range: 40”
UR: 5
Damage: 2d10 explosive
Notes: Can be fired on either ground targets or airborne targets


Pilot Jack O’kiase (CASS-E)
Cost: 6
Skill: 1d6+1
Move: 4”
Armor: 1d6-1
Notes: Oxygen tank painted on back is actually parachute, allowing him to eject and land safely

Image

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 1:02 am
by King of Brix
Its... Big. And cool. I would say it's useful, only I don't want to lie. I never use flying vehicles in my brikwars games... But it is cool... Good job!

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 2:03 am
by Olothontor
It is actually a good representation of the Warhawk... wow. Although the actual warhawk has gatling guns on the front, as opposed to straight up cannons. What I usually try to do with my vehicles is have a basic chassis that I can build and then add weapons onto, so i can have different vehicles for different situations. Just a tip from your local Destrunctionater :) .

Also, as to what King of Brix has to say, yes. Flying vehicles in Brikwars are actually kind of annoying, because you need to calculate the lift:forward thrust ratio while still staying within the movement limit. I prefer hover to flying, it's easier to represent. If something is twenty inches in the air, it's a bit difficult to represent, especially on the fly.

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:54 am
by The Lizard King
Very Nice Job!

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 12:09 pm
by DarkWolf
Olothontor wrote:It is actually a good representation of the Warhawk... wow. Although the actual warhawk has gatling guns on the front, as opposed to straight up cannons. What I usually try to do with my vehicles is have a basic chassis that I can build and then add weapons onto, so i can have different vehicles for different situations. Just a tip from your local Destrunctionater :) .

Also, as to what King of Brix has to say, yes. Flying vehicles in Brikwars are actually kind of annoying, because you need to calculate the lift:forward thrust ratio while still staying within the movement limit. I prefer hover to flying, it's easier to represent. If something is twenty inches in the air, it's a bit difficult to represent, especially on the fly.
Yes, I realize the actual Eucadian Warhawks have gatling guns (I should know, I was staring at the damn thing for 4+ hours) But the only part I could use for a gatling gun, I don't have. So I just used the cannons from the recon gunship in the MT-101 Armored Mining Unit set.
The ability to swap out weapons is a cool idea, and I've thought of it before, but I don't use it that much. I've got so many parts, I just build specific units for specific tasks. I've got 4 different fighters currently built, an Interceptor with two laser cannons, an Air Superiorty Fighter with two laser cannons and four air-to-air missiles, A fighter/bomber with two cannons and four air-to-surface missiles, and an uber fighter with two cannons and six missiles that can target either ground or air targets.

And yes, I realize that intricate dogfights in a ground and air battle is a pain in the ass, so I'm working on a few gunships and transports to aid the ground forces, and I only intend to use the fighters in open ocean missions or on large battlefields where I need to provide covering fire for the transports (do you have any idea how much it sucks to load up your entire ground force into transports, then see them all get shot down half a mile short of the target area with no survivors? Or to have them disembark and then have the transport get shot down, and crash on them?) And the whole movement thing, as far as I'm concerned, maneuvering (diving, climbing, banking) for every inch you want to go in the new direction, it costs an inch of movement, and banking you must go forward 3 inches for every inch in the direction your turning. Of course, we can also do this the cheap and easy way, and just have them pivot on the spot (this is the future after all) and skip that whole load of bull.

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 4:27 pm
by Yak
Cool pics Darkwolf!

Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:20 pm
by piltogg
that is a good idea for the base of it when it is flying
but i think it fly's a little too fast whitch can make the game less fun.

Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:31 pm
by DarkWolf
piltogg wrote:that is a good idea for the base of it when it is flying
but i think it fly's a little too fast whitch can make the game less fun.
Thanks, though it was one of my more rushed jobs. I basically grabbed a large plate, ripped the engine off my old Y-Wing Bomber, stuck the two togeather and stuck it underneath the Warhawk. As for speed, well, I run big maps. Getting across the map quickly is important if I want to see carnage sometime this spring. I'm currently building airborne troop-transports, as well as a huge arsed mofo to carry my IKE-3 across the battlefield. Really wish I had finished some of those troop-transports before my battle last night. All the action happened well short of where I intended, but that didn't stop it from being sweet, if not..... short, and incredibly one sided (still writing it up)