SG2: DFFG at infantry

>1.	It depends on how you mounted them.  If it's a twin mount (ie:
twin
>turret), then they're fired together using 1 action (Q + FC + FC).   If

>they're mounted separately, then they can only be fire using to
separate
>fire actions.	Overall the twin mount is more efficient, but you need
to use
>you other action to avoid wastage (movement is good)

If they are sighted at the same impact point, why would you roll two
separate FC die?  Same FC system guides both weapons... think about a
quad
.50 cal anti-aircraft mount - you have ONE FC system for all of the
weapons....

** The rules, my friend.

In the case of a turret mounting two DFFGs, one would assume they are
made
to be fired together at the same target, so roll a Quality die and a
*single* FC die.  But since there are two weapons firing, if there is a
hit, the IMPACTs would be rolled separately.

** Not right at all. Here's why: I mount a quad 50 mount. I wish to fire
the mount at something. Now, if it was 4 SAWs being fired by a squad,
it'd be Unit Quality + 4 x SAW FP. On a vehicle, FP is replaced by FC.
If you only roll two dice, you never generate a suppression. And I don't
want to have to try 4 SEPARATE fire actions to fire my quad .50 mount.
So we replace FP with FC (not great, but it is the standard way a SAW
becomes semi-useless on a low FC vehicle). Thus we roll Quality + #
weaps x weap FC.

** and think of what you are saying: I fire a quad fifty by your method,
roll 1 FC and 1 quality. That's the same as a single .50. So I'm going
to get the same # of hits since I'm using the same # of dice though I'm
firing 4x the number of rounds.... not acceptable.

Alternately, the FC system might be set up to fire each of the DFFGs
separately using the same FC, but from a game mechanic point of view,
you
couldn't fire them with the same ACTION.
You would have to roll (Q + FC)
for the first weapon, resolve the hit, and then spend a separate action
to
fire the other weapon.	This is kind of unusual though - the only reason
to
have two of the same kind of weapon in the same turret with the same FC
system is to maximize the potential damage, so they'd fire together...
On
the other hand, maybe with weapons like the DFFG they need time to cool
between shots, so you put two in the turret to increase your fire
rate.....

** You put a quad .50 mount together to give massive suppression fire
(I've seen these from 'Nam and they looked evil to be downrange of) and
a dual DFFG probably to get more FP. Mostly you do it because the model
has it.

Anyway, in the case described in the question, you should roll ONE hit
for
the combined weapons (Q + FC) and impact for the weapons SEPARATELY.

** WRONG. That makes a multiple mount pointless. And doesn't increase
its suppression and damage likelihood.

I don't think there is any occasion covered by the rules that you would
see
more than ONE FC die being rolled in a single fire action.

** See the parrallel to multiple SAWs firing from a squad.

When infantry fire and add in support weapons, you can have more than
one
FIREPOWER die (Quality, squad rifles' firepower, SAW firepower, IAVR
firepower if used, etc), but that is the only case where there would be
more than 2 dice used in the FIREPOWER roll.  Never with vehicle FC
systems.

** It is a simple extension of the same principle. In a sense, though
their is one FC system, your FC is substituting for FP otherwise YOU GET
NO BENEFIT FROM THE EXTRA WEAPON. Since you won't generate more hits,
and since all hits are resolved individually anyway....  (that is to say
that if it is a SAW style of weapon, you'll get hits in some
relationship to the # of pips on your dice. If it is a Heavy Weapon,
you'll attack everyone in the squad one time for a hit. Given you only
roll once.... one hit. Unless you are suggesting roll 1 FC and 1 FP and
hit everyone in the squad twice with a D8 automatically... that's gross
too). Plus their should be an advantage in your odds to hit another
vehicle if you make a quad or dual DFFG mount. The exra die gives you
that.

** Of course, in fairness to Adrian, we are in *unofficial, unmarked*
territory. It would be interesting if Jon had anything to say. Deus Ex
Cathedra and all that.

Ummm...

not quite.

The d8 impact against infantry is for anti-armour weapons used against
infantry.  If the heavy weapon is an anti-infantry specific weapon, or
uses
anti-infantry ammunition, then you use the impact as it is listed.  Now,

this is kind of vague, 'cause most of the heavy weapons listed in the
rules
are anti-tank anyway, but what the rule in the book says (pg 40) about
using d8 impact is specific to situations when "a tank or other heavy
combat vehicle needs or wished to fire its 'main" direct-fire armament
against an infantry target;  this IS possible, but is generally not very

effective...." etc.

An example would be the RFAC.  We know that an RFAC size class 1 is
basically a 50 cal machinegun, or a 20mm autocannon.  Any soldier on the

list will tell you that the 50 cal mg makes a devestating anti-infantry
weapon, and there's no way its impact value would not go DOWN vs an
infantry target, compared to its impact on a truck, for example.

** I'd like you to cite the page where it says you don't use D8. RFAC is
an anti-armour weapon for certain. I know you use this interpretation
for RFAC, but a 20mm Canon is not an anti-infantry weapon though it can
serve as such. And I agree with your logic. OTOH, there is no way its FP
should go down (being replaced with an FC dice). I fire a .50 at you on
simple FC and I'm rolling quality + d6, and if I fire it from a tripod
probably quality + D10. So they already penalize SAW type weapons or ACs
on vehicles badly. Though I agree with your logic about the weapons, and
I think the RFAC should also have an FP number for shooting at infantry,
the game doesn't provide for it in the canon rules. BTW, I think if I
actually hit a gropos with a DFFG, d8 is a tad short on Impact. A DFFG
would splatter him like a grape hitting a windshield at 100 mph....  but
that's the game mechanics.

An IAVR has an impact of d12 vs dispersed targets (infantry) making it
rather devastating (pg 34).

** Or d10 if you look at the reference sheet. ?

If a vehicle mounted heavy weapon fires a
round with a warhead with similar effectiveness (considering that the
IAVR
is really an anti-ARMOUR weapon), why would it do LESS damage?

** Because the rules say so. (Or at least you have to acknowledge what
the rules say and what we think should be true). My comments above about
rolling more FC dice are probably based on an extension of the infantry
multiple weapons rule to vehicles, but your impressions of what an RFAC
should do are the same. An RFAC is a Heavy Weapon as far as the game is
concerned.

** Of course, as always, this is IMO and YMMV.