Prev: Re: Roughnecks: Down Under! Next: Re: What is AoG thinking?

Re: [ds2] Portable Heavy Weapons (was: Dirtside powered armor)

From: Henrix <henrix@p...>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 01:07:53 +0100
Subject: Re: [ds2] Portable Heavy Weapons (was: Dirtside powered armor)

Bell, Brian K wrote (in a couple of messages):

> [Bri] Agreed. The question was not from me but rather from Brian
> Having 2 Brian B's on the list can be confusing.

Terribly sorry! I realized halfway through my reply that there were two
of you,
but obviously I still managed to confuse you two. I hope I have avoided
that in
this message :-)

> In the Grey Day scenario, I was TROUBLED to see a tank with a
> HKP-5 or MDC-5 (can't remember) not be able to target a vehicle that
> would have been at short range in DS2 (30" or 36" [300" or 360" SG
> inches]).

I think that is mostly a question of game balance. I have played games
targets can be engaged from one table-edge to another, and, although
not particularily fun, as it often boils down the game to who can get
into a
good position first.

> [Bri] Many of the rules are beautiful. However, I object to the game
>   divergence between DS2 and SG2. One would think that two SF
>   ground combat games from the same company would fit the mechanics
>   in such a way that given 2 identical situations in both games that
>   the results would be similar. This, unfortunately, is not the case
>   DS2 and SG2.
I must say that I don't agree with you there. I rather enjoy the
The alternative seems to be to play DS in 25mm scale and SG in 1/300.
Both of
course plausible (in particular the 1/300 SG). The difference is not
only in
scale but in what the games emphasize, DS armour and SG, well, the poor
I certainly would not enjoy it if a tank with a HKP/3 had a short range
of 180"
in SG. My gaming table just isn't big enough, though if we played on the
we could manage at least medium range, possibly long if we keep all
doors open

>   When the long awaited 'Bugs Don't Surf' comes out,
>   I hope that there will be a section that brings the two systems
>   together (in results if not mechanics).
Bugs don't surf? Sounds like a reference to something I have no
knowledge of,
except that as a scenario description on some homepage I have browsed
in the past. Is it to be (still, my heart!) Kra'Vak and Sa'Vasku rules

Bell, Brian K wrote (in a another message):

> > 5) PHWs are good for a limited number of shots in DS2. The power
> > used to power the weapons run out in the case of HEL/P and MDC/P.
> > element can only carry a limited number of reloads for RFAC/P,
DFFG/P, and
> > GSM/P. Borrowing from SG2, I suggest providing counters to indicate
> > of the PHW rounds.

Oh, don't. They are a nuisance as it is in SG.

> >
> > Weapon	     Close	    Medium	    Long
> > HEL/P	       16"	       -	      -
> > RFAC/P		8"	      12"	      -
> > MDC/P (GAC/P)	8"	      16"	      -
> > DFFG/P		4"	       8"	      -
> > GSM/P	       16"	       -	      -

Would there not be a point to have long range for these  weapons? Treat
everything beyond IAVR range as one range band further away, or
Letting them have as good FCs as you suggested and treating their
maximum range
as medium or even close seems a little too good.

I think I would stick to some simpler rule, altogether. And leave the
effective at close range only. I don't really think they merit such an
special treatment.
But then, I am not really a DS player, having only played it a few times
to try
it out :-)
It _was_ my first GZG game though, or actually DS1 was, but I never
played it,
just read the little yellow booklet.


Prev: Re: Roughnecks: Down Under! Next: Re: What is AoG thinking?