Re: GZG DS2 Mikko: Genres for DS2.

Tom Anderson <tom.anderson@altavista.net> wrote:
>[in part this is a reply to mikko; i missed his earlier post. sorry.]
> ---- andrew martin wrote:
>> Mikko Kurki-Suonio <maxxon@swob.dna.fi> wrote:
>> >On Sun, 13 Sep 1998 tom.anderson@altavista.net wrote:
>> >> this is because the HS SPDS is not a generic system > >> fault of
DS2 - it is impossible in *any* system, because it simply does
>> >> not make any sense.
>> >I can not agree. Playing *in* the Slammers universe does NOT
necessarily
>> >mean playing *with* Hammer's Slammers (or the top-notch tech they
have).
>true.
    That's dead right! :-)

>> >Take the indig forces in the final battle of The Warrior. They were
>> >warring before either merc force showed up with powerguns and other
fancy
>> >stuff. You might want to play pure hashemites vs. whoever-they-were.
>> >These forces *did* utilize GMS, apparently to some effect.
>>     Then you need rules to adequately simulate wire guided missile
systems
>> and laser designated missile systems. You still need to disallow DSII
GMS.
>
>maybe, or (going out on a limb here) you need to seriously beef up PDS
or
ECM. although the rulebook says DS2 missiles are smart fire-and-forget,
the
rules themselves do not. they just say that they are missiles; it is not
possible to infer smartness from the rules alone.
    ECM and PDS defences and no turret or hull down modifiers means that
DSII GMS are smart, fire and forget missiles.
    With wire guided missiles, ECM would be ineffective as the human eye
guides the missile. Turret down and hull down modifiers should be
additional
defence versus wire-guided missiles.

> this is a slightly odd point, but what i mean is that you don't
necessarily need to change the GMS rules but add new interception rules.
    Yes. I've already written some. They will be up on my site soon.
Basically, because the missile speed is slow, any opposing unit can
interrupt the launcher's COMBAT action. The missile launch flash is
detected
and any opposing, unactivated, unit can shoot at the launcher with
direct
fire main gun and/or APSW.

>how about APSW can be used as ECM by firing it at the firer? any
suppressed
infantry unit automatically loses any missiles in flight? not quite sure
how
to extend this to vehicle-launched GMS.
    Yes. Using a combat active to eliminate the infantry team or causing
a
supression result (the infantry ducks and can't continue guiding the
missile). Using a combat action to hit the launching vehicle/bunker and
causing damage or better (worse for launcher!) with main gun fire.

>incidentally, how was this handled in HS? what if i outfitted a slammer
panzer with ATGW: you would have to engage me with your main gun, and if
i
had proper training i would ignore it and let my driver try and evade.
and
hope i killed you first.
    The missile launcher has to stay in line of sight of the target. No
pop-up manouevers! Im my rules, I've said that any hit that causes
damage
(or worse) to the launching vehicle, causes the missile to miss.
    I've also said that the launching vehicle can't move while the
missile
is on the way. This would mean that the defence die is effectively D1.
This
might be a little unfair, though. If we assume that the wire leading to
the
missile is reasonably strong, the launching vehicle could defend using
it's
normal signature die. This would mean less rule changes.

>of course, this doesn't help with bring-n-battle, but i stand by my
earlier
statement on that.
    As do I.

>> >Perhaps the change in warfare brought in by the appearance of the
mercs
is
>> >*exactly* the thing you want to "simulate", playing some battles
with
>> >indig only forces and then some with merc support added.
>>     The "you" here is "Mikko" not "Tom".
>
>ah, but on the internet, how can you be so sure ... :-)
>i think this would be an interesting campaign.
    Yes. It would!

>>     Actually Tom didn't say that! You did. Don't put words in his
mouth
or
>> text in his e-mail!
>
>suddenly andrew seems to have become my big brother :-) i feel a little
less manly for this, but i can take it. it's the 90s.
    I'm sorry for making you feel less manly! Let's have a hug! [ ] :-)

>> >No. The right answer is to properly cost the Slammers SPDS (and
other
>> >equipment).
>> >Once you get the points cost right, there's no reason Slammers
couldn't
>> >play in a pickup game.
>
>[i assume this means to cost them in the context of regular DS2 and
thus
allow them in any DS2 games]
>
>no. this would mean either (a) properly costing every single piece of
sf
warfare equipment ever invented, in case anyone wanted to use it, or (b)
providing a points-cost calculating system which would work for
anything. i
don't think either are practical. besides, the value of a piece of
equipment
often depends on the other equipment in use.
    Yes. This would indeed be impractical. See the Fleet Book (which
I've
just got!) where Jon Tuffley gives his opinion of wave guns and other
super
weapons.

>unless you want PV on the basis of real material cost, but that is
impossible as real costs vary from universe to universe. the reason HS
never
fase DS2 F+F GMS is that electronics are expensive in the HS universe.
they
are cheap in the DS2 universe or any reasonable extension of our modern
world (free digital cellphone when you open a Barclays student account,
anyone?).
    Yes. That's exactly right. I've always regarded the points cost as
more
an indication of the effort/money/tech a nation/country has to spend to
get
the vehicle/troops etc.

>> Properly costing wire-guided and laser-designated missiles is more
the
>> issue.
>
>fair enough. if you brought HS forces into a vanilla DS2 game (eg at a
B+B)
you would get smoked by GMS which is a century more advanced than what
the
HS are prepared for.
    Yes.

>>     Appropriate limitations would still have to apply to the opponent
>> forces. Like no GMS, only wire-guided or laser designated missile
systems.
>absolutely not! if you want to take a no-ECM no-PDS HS force up against
GMS-armed vanilla DS2 in a B+B, you deserve everything you get.
    Yes, in a B+B that's exactly right! I was intending this for the HS
genre.

>> >If they still get to face a GMS-only force, well, isn't combined
arms,
>> >variety and all that exactly what the realism advocates always keep
>> >preaching about?
>>     A GMS armed force facing a HS genre force would slaughter the HS
force.
>> There would be no laser designators aimed at the HS force. GMS would
be
>> fired from VTOLs performing pop-ups. The GMS would be coming in at
>> supersonic speeds with no noticeable launching flash. The HS force
would
>> not be able to knock down the GMS as their satellites won't be able
to
>> detect the launcher's flash in time before the missile strikes.
Remember
>> that, in DSII, turret down and hull down modifiers don't apply versus
GMS
>> attacks. Only ECM and PDS can defend, due to the speed the missile
travels >> at. Also remember that while iridium protects well against
powergun shots,
>> it defends the same as normal armour against shaped charge warheads.
>right. what i said, only said first and in more detail.
    Yes.

Andrew Martin
Shared email: Al.Bri@xtra.co.nz
Web Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/
Blind See-Saw Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/SEE-SAW/
Dirtside II Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/DSII/
Dirtside II FAQ: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/DSII/FAQ/
GZG E-Mail FAQ:
http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/DSII/FAQ/Ettiquette.html
FUDGE GM Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/FUDGE/