Re: DS2: Design questions of my own.

--- Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@hotmail.com> wrote:

> MTT-15A
> Class 4 Fast Tracked, FGP
> Armor 4, Stealth 3, Superior ECM & FireCon
> MDC 5
> Sup PDS
> APFC

Looks good.

> Current competitors:
> 
> Bid V/I-X-1
> Class 4 HMT
> Armor 4R Stealth 2
> Superior Systems
> 2 Infantry
> GMS/H
> MDC 2

It's not reflected in the DSII rules, but I wouldn't
(from a roleplaying standpoint) put reactive armor on
a troop carrier.  I know some nations do, but I
wouldn't feel comfortable with it.

This is not a bad design, but it's really kinda big.

> Bid V/I-X-2
> Class 4 HMT
> Armor 4R Stealth 2
> Superior Systems
> 2 Infantry
> DFFG 3 (Justified by the close-in nature of much
> terrain, and the fact that 
> they will work cloely with the big guns of the
> kodiak)
> EPDS

I just hate DFFGs on general purpose.  EXCEPT, as
support elements.  The NRE's rule is 2/3-1/3, either
MDC or HKP and DFFG.  The MDC units are base of fire,
the DFFGs maneuver in close to assault.  You might
consider this as a weapons carrier in your heavy
weapons platoon (if you have them)--it would be a good
complement to GMS teams.

I would suggest instead:
Size 3
MDC/1
GMS/H
2 Teams

BUT: Here's the problem I have from a doctrinal
standpoint.  If you mount long-range anti-armor
weapons on troop carriers you get confused as to
exactally what you're driving.	Is it a troop carrier,
or is it a tank destroyer?  Do you want to standoff at
4 km and shoot at tanks, or do you want to drive up to
the nearest covered/concealed position and offload
your infantry and serve as close-range support?  Are
you wasting your infantry riding in tank destroyers,
or are you wasting this lethal long-range weapon by
using it as an APC?  

Me, I figure GMS/Hs are what you have a D Company for.

John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/