Do the cops often trap you in your hangar? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) But that's got style, hands down.


18 actually. I'd prefer the LC P-2 (same body score, faster, moremaneuverable, more stealth oriented) and upgrade it to VSTOL. YMMV. Upon rereading though, I was wrong about the LCP-2 being wore than the ED Mistral, because it's actually just a bit better, too. Pity they didn't pick up the old R3R alternative model names, though.

*Sighs* Never gamed yet. Three groups lined up and each and every one of them fell through. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

And I love the alternative names for things. Might have to do something about that if we can ever get the Dumpshock Data Haven back on track...

That sucks, man. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)


The Embraer-Dassault Mistral is based on the now oop Ares Daytripper, because Aztech bought design and rights to it from Ares when they introduced their new tilt-wing traveller machines. Similar models are: Cessna C860 and CASA J-329 Kestrel (Rigger 3, German edition, supposedly identical to Rigger 3 Revised). Also, according to the same book, the Mistral off the shelf seats 17, including pilot and copilot, and is accessible by one side door and a tail-mounted freight ramp.

I will take this opportunity to, once again, complain about the lack of seating and cargo space per vehicle, rather than generic "Here's a suggestion" bit. Yeah, it makes rules easier, but still, it's not that much more complex.

It's not like we're trying to figure out the fuel efficiency of a Methane-powered vehicle after all.

EDIT: And, yes, it sucks. Very badly.

+1 (and really, with these modding rules, the increase in ease is marginal at best).

And let's not talk about fuel efficiency. That part of Rigger 3 still gives me nightmares. Nominal ranges per battery/gas tank filling would be nice though.


Tried online gaming? It's a little more reliable in my experience.

Can't do online. Don't know why, just can't.

Pity. Helped me still have my games on and off even though all the people I play with are either constantly on the move, or do live someplacefar off now. I do miss the old get-togehters, though.

I guess it has something to do with RL changes between 1st and 2nd edition - while the original Shadowrun was developed the USSR was still around, then it was suddenly gone.

Heh, had a look at the pdf today.

while for the most part the tactical helicopters looks sane, the aircrafts towards the back do no.

The MIG got 3 point, one will likely be taken up by a gun. Non are listed as reinforced, but if one assume so then the best bet for carrying a large payload is the Hail Barrage. Anything else will result in 1 gun and 2 launch weapons! The image looks like a F-16/F-35 knockoff, and the F-165 can carry 7 launch weapons plus gun. And that do not account for the ability to carry multiple rounds via racks.

the SU seems modeled on the F-22, but even there things go weird. 2 concealed? Try 8+gun. The 3 external was close to the 4 tho. But those 4 can again take racks.

Not sure how these are supposed to be used. En mass, or via heavy drone support?

Well, hobgoblin, just as I've noted up there - current gen Sus have 9 to 11 hardpoints, plus a chin-mounted Gryazev-Shpagin...
I believe the low number of weapons is meant to tone down the craft's relative power, minding that the design is at least 40 years old; but still, that all just doesn't make much sense...

This (And earlier) is also a time of downchecking military equipment to make it last longer and not be as expensive.

Even taking training into consideration, Metahuman Life just got so cheap that military equipment got to be too expensive. (Take the comments about the bombs costing more than the targets destroyed today, and magnify it through a Corporate Boardroom!).

The Combat Multiplier cost more than to just send in the base "Combat" itself in at a multiple number of times.

To whit: More boots, less fancy jets that can mount multiple weapon racks.

Uh, you see, CanRay, the chassis, the avionics and the engines - you know, the expensive parts of the jet besides the pilot (although a good fighter jet pilot is goddamn expensive, as well) - they cost the same whether you mount three weapons or eleven. And the planes discussed are dual-engine jet fighters, there's just no reason for them not to be armed. Hell, the Reckoner, which is basically L-39 70 years later, is armed almost no worse than the Founder, which is supposed to "incorporate the first Euro-War experience". I guess that experience was "do not start wars for no fraggin reason", huh?

"War is bad for business. We're in the business of doing business. Thus, we do not wish war. So, we will make bad military products to encourage people not to have expensive wars that destroy valuable property. Infantry is so much cheaper and far less destructive. And we can sell in bulk to Infantry."

Haha, that logic'd work if S&K was making that MiG (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Really? Who owns MiG then?

Oh, you think so huh? Who owns them? And the people they answer to? And those people? And the people above them?

The Corporate Court does not want War in any way, shape, or form. It is literally "Bad For Business". It destroys property values, expensive factories, and so on. Oh, sure, the Military Industrial Complex is a great way to make a profit, as long as it's kept in check.

And that, not-so-gentle'runners is why we have Desert Wars!

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Minding that MiG is not listed among the S&K subsidiaries neither in Corporate Download nor in Corporate Guide, while Shadows of Asia states that some parts of the Russian economy are still planned, I presume that MiG, as well as Su, Il or other military industry like Nizhniy Tagil Inc. or Krasnoe Sormovo are state-owned. Or at least the state has the majority vote.

War is incredibly profitable, especially when it happens somewhere where your rival's factories and workers are, while yours are not. That's why the military contractors in the USA say nothing against Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya.
Same way the Sixth World has a bunch of countries corps do not really care about, like, say, the Awakened Yakut, which chopped up the megacorp negotiators when they arrived to discuss the feature business plans.

Yeah, but US Military Contractors aren't countries in their own rights...

And wars have a nasty tendency of spilling over into their extraterritorial land.

What? No drones? No vehicle mods? No new miniguns to put on those attack choppers? Nothing affordable at character creation? How bout some rules for upgrading vehicle armor with Modifications like personal armor (the vehicle mod that does this is way way worse.)

Would it kill you guys to make a supplement the average game will want to purchase?

I'm an average gamer and I bought and liked it. Gives something for PCs to strive for. The art for the jets is right out of left field (As has been commented on, so I'm leaving that Dead Centaur to mature in the desert heat.).

Anyhow, it's "Unfriendly Skies: New stuff that flies", just what it says on the tin.

If you want Drones, they're in "This Old Drone" and "MilSpecTech". Rules for upgrading armour is in Arsenal (And if you don't like it, Houserule.).

And it sold, so, no, it's not killing them at all. Quite the opposite in fact.

That said, I still wish there was a flying MPUV now...

DON'T check 'this old drone' because the stats are totally out there. Or rather, if you check it, write your own stats. Because CGL don't do Errata, eve on phenomenally broken product like this.


It's a booster rockets and LTA add-on vehicle mod away. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Or were you looking for something like this?

I'm (We're) Average... I bought it... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Something like that.

Depends on what you do in the Air Force. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Indeed, I know a Pararescue vet who may take umbrage to saying all the officers do is fly away on stuff they don't take care of (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)