Prev: RE: Good Guys(Humor) - Was: RE: [FH] About the UN again (sorry Be ast) Next: RE: Good Guys(Humor) NPI Scandal.

Re: [DS2] Multiple and Mixed weapons turrets

From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 12:10:32 EDT
Subject: Re: [DS2] Multiple and Mixed weapons turrets

On Fri, 20 Jul 2001 11:34:38 -0400 "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
<> writes:
>I am unsure that it would generally happen. People tend to stay at one 
>if it is somewhat effective rather than switch to another task, even 
>if it
>is more effective, if it envolves a change of mind-set. 
>I find it difficult to believe that the gunner in a vehicle would get 
>from his controls for the main vehicle gun to grab the controls of the
>remote APSW. Then jump back and forth. Even if the same controls could 
>switched from the main gun to the APSW, a change in mind-set and time 
>the software to load parameters for the new weapon would present some 
>and degredation in effeciency. The gunner would be changing to a new 
>set of
>mental clues to look for as targets, a new set of effective ranges,
>different readouts to indicate the staticstics of the weapon (is it
>overheating? Is it near the end of ammo? Is it near the end of its 
>etc.). Especially if the gunner is worried that while he is firing the
>spitgun at soft targets, that an enemy Deimos may crest the hill and 
>him away. 

Soft targets with IAVR's.

But again I figure either the commander has the APSW control with the
gunner the main gun or they are on the same console.  With the AI
tracking everything flawlessly behind hills/ridges and through woods
must be almost a HUD like display for the crew members (how those this
integrate with the Mark-1 eyeball?)    And implies they have some
game consoles in their off-duty hours...  AI as smart as it is presented
should be calculating threats and possible responses in the background
while the main processor(s) deal with what the humans are interested in.


>The same reasoning applies to switching guns in the same turret. If 
>you are
>firing the MDC/3 at an approaching Andromeda, you won't want to take 
>time to switch to a DFFG/3 (even if it can be done in 15 seconds and 
>MDC/3 takes 20 seconds to reload). 

Same target, the parameters known, the AI should have produced answers
for both guns and sequenced them (subject to override) sequentially for
maximum 'effectiveness' and it should take only a second for the fire to
'ripple' towards the target.  YMMV.

>As has been pointed out a lot in the DS2 turn is abstracted (hence the
>variable time of a turn). One of these things is the weapons fire. 
>weapons fire is not, specifically, one shot. It represents the 
>of the weapon, gunner and vehicle driver over the entire time frame of 
>turn. It's not just that you fire your HVC/2 at the Paladin. It is 
>that you
>maneuver around the defile for a clean shot, fire, but miss, evade 
>reloading, and fire again, this time tagging it dead center.
>Brian Bell

To a point I agree with your logic.  And it is a great granularity for
this level of game.  

But in this abstracted turn and considering the supposed high level of
that never loses track of a squad that goes into a woods or a vehicle
that goes behind a hill, I think it would be child's play to figure out
the parameters for firing two dissimilar weapons (MDC and DFFG) in the
same turret at the same target.  

Multiple targets, yes, this is too in game terms (Ryan and I have been
having an interesting off-line discussion on this topic) compared to
single turret configurations; but two weapons at the same target
shouldn't be so difficult if the AI can never lose track of a target
it is spotted by any unit.  [Guess no one uses ASAT weapons in the
future...] but I only plan to use these dissimilar configurations in
local games where a house rule will cover this configuration/situation. 
I know, easy way out but if you come to Saint Louis and play in one of
campaign based scenarios involving these designs (not all that common,
IIRC only two forces use them at all and not everything is that way) be
sure and read the house rule for this.

Of course if one wants to begin edging ever so slightly into WRG or
"SFB-DS2" situations you could penalize one or both weapons with a
modifier... "Grasshopper, that is how the decay starts, one small
modifier at a time..."

This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.

Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:

Prev: RE: Good Guys(Humor) - Was: RE: [FH] About the UN again (sorry Be ast) Next: RE: Good Guys(Humor) NPI Scandal.