Issue 206: Weapon Specialist #4510
Conversation
…when all wps match
| /** @return True when the given EquipmentType is a valid choice for the Sandblaster SPA. */ | ||
| public static boolean isSandblasterValid(EquipmentType equipmentType) { | ||
| return (equipmentType instanceof WeaponType) | ||
| && ((equipmentType instanceof UACWeapon) || (equipmentType instanceof LBXACWeapon) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One comment here, which is that the "rapid fire autocannons" weapon allows standard ACs to behave like UACs (at the risk of exploding), so I think standard autocannons should be included in this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As a suggestion, I have added a GameOptions parameter here based on which all ACs may be allowed. Both MM and MHQ can supply GameOptions and so it'll reflect the state of the game/campaign. The GameOptions can be nulled if necessary but I have not added versions without the additional parameter as we'd really want the GameOpts to be given. I think MML won't need these methods.
Aside from that I've removed Streaks from Sandblaster as they don't use the cluster table and C3 from the weapon specialist (hehe).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@NickAragua Any thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, lost track of this one.
I think there are some situations (mostly involving high powered ECM as I recall) where Streak launchers revert to cluster rolls, so there may be a case for Sandblaster applying to them.
Tying sandblaster availability to "rapid fire AC" rules is ok.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, I've re-allowed Streaks for those Angel ECM encounters and removed infantry attacks (leg attack etc) from Weapon Specialist (doesn't seem in the spirit of the rules)
…er), disallow Inf. attacks for weapon spec.
|
Good point with AMS, I've changed that to allow AMS with the AMS as weapon game option. |
# Conflicts: # megamek/src/megamek/common/actions/WeaponAttackAction.java
Fixes #206