Prev: DS 2 questions was Re: Philosophy/Design of SF War Games Next: Re: Well, too interesting to drop all of the posts in this thread...

RE: Philosophy/Design of SF War Games

From: "John K. Lerchey" <lerchey@a...>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 22:02:43 -0400
Subject: RE: Philosophy/Design of SF War Games

Likewise, replies inline.

--On Tuesday, July 27, 2004 9:54 AM +1000 "Robertson, Brendan" 
<Brendan.Robertson@dva.gov.au> wrote:

> Replies inline:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brian B [mailto:greywanderer987@yahoo.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 7:06 AM
>>
>> 5. PDS that can engage incoming MDC/HKP/HVC/SLAM
>> attacks.
>
> That's already subsumed into the attack roll mechanics.
>

Um... no it isn't.  The direct fire attack rules give you an attack die 
based on FCS vs the targets aspect.  The missile attack rules give you
an 
attack die based on the missiles targeting system, but the defender gets
an 
explicit ECM roll *AND* a PDS roll *if* it has PDS.  Even with PDS
systems, 
you do NOT get the second die vs MDC/HKP/HVC/SLAM attacks.

:)

John K. Lerchey
Computer and Network Security Coordinator
Carnegie Mellon University

lerchey@andrew.cmu.edu

Prev: DS 2 questions was Re: Philosophy/Design of SF War Games Next: Re: Well, too interesting to drop all of the posts in this thread...