Arkathan said:
Upon review, I do not see a displacement value for cannonades.
It's undefined. I assume it's a bug.
I guesstimated 40 Dt, since 4 hardpoints and vaguely comparable to a small bay, but made it adjustable in my spreadsheet.
Arkathan said:
Also, I fail to see the point of the weapon.
In some cases it might be useful?
A Fusion carronade (16D) is better than a small Fusion bay (1DD≈10D) even against heavy armour, but wastes hardpoints.
A carronade presumably has no penalties firing on a fighter, unlike bays.
Arkathan said:
If I am evaluating this correctly: Four single turrets with a Plasma Gun does as much damage at the same range, costs less, uses less power and does not have an armor penalty.
Plasma turret weapons are from the High Tech chapter, by default they are not available in a MgT2 OTU campaign. They are optional rules.
The rules are vague because they were available in earlier editions, but not in T5 that MgT2 is synced with.
Normally you have to make do with lasers and missile racks in turrets.
Arkathan said:
Groups of weapons can be linked, so there is no benefit, unless the Devs are using magic no-space pocket weapon as the intended benefit.
No?
Weapons in a turret are linked, but each turret fires separately, and deducts armour separately.
A triple plasma turret against, say, Armour 12 would do 3D+6 - 12 ≈ 4.5 damage. Four turrets 18 damage.
A plasma carronade would do 12D - 12 × 2 ≈ 18 damage.
Roughly equal. Ironically the carronade would be better against heavy armour, since it deducts armour twice, the four turrets deducts armour four times.
.
