Re: DS2: Design questions of my own.

Jon Davis wrote:

>:-)  The armed forces may argue for it, but the politicians still have
>to pay for it and the public has to approve it.
>
>Even with two levels of stealth for 200 points, you're going from
>a target signature die of D4 to D8.  A D8 target still gets hit
>fairly frequently by the other HKP and MDC weapons.  For 200 more
>points, you go to a D12 target die and an 800+ point vehicle.
>Stealth provides no benefit from the SLAMs or the MAK heavy
>artillery bombardments.
>
>If you make your vehicles too expensive, it would soon become
>cost effective for the CAF's enemies to use tactical nukes to
>take out one or more of these vehicles.  A nuke costs 1000 pts.
>and instantly destroys any target within 2" of the impact marker.
>
>Nukes aren't fooled by stealth either. :-)

Of course, if the nukes start flying, it really doesn't matter How good
a 
tank or how many tanks - glowing is glowing.

As for the cost issue, remember that gaming background economic cost is
not 
the same as points cost.  A platoon of 627 point MT-5 Kodiaks is a
smaller 
percentage of the Cascadian defense budget than one Class 3, CFE, 
RFAC-equipped, Basic systems vehicle might cost a lesser power.  to put
it 
simply, Cascadia's ecnomy produces more "points."

Brian B2

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx