>>11449259
You make it sound like it's a money issue. Once upon a time, people bought ALL of that shit (and doubles/triples/quadruples/etc).

>>11449319
I mostly agree with you that two seaters are weak shit, hence me never owning a Vamp. A small, two seater car with exposed seating is kinda worthless, because the driver/passsanger is exposed everytime you want to use the machine guns.

Give it an ARMORED cabin AND MISSILES, where you fire at shit from behind cover or over horizon? That actually makes sense, looks cooler, and thusly, makes it more playable. It acts as a diorama piece, a setting that your GI Joes can attack because Cobra is planning on shooting jets down from a foreign military air base. Your Cobra figures also won't immediately die in the assault, because the vehicle actually offers protection.
So there's a lot of play value here.

I never liked the Vamp. It can't carry troops. No armor. Weakly armed. I think the only reason it gets any attention is purely for nostalgia reasons and nostalgia is nothing but poison. I own dozens of other vehicles and even when they have less armor, at least they can carry a bunch of heavily armed individuals to their next battle or carries a bigger weapon.
They should have made the VAMP 2 instead.