Prev: Re: [GZG] GEVs Next: Re: [GZG] Subject: Re: What are the pitfalls of standardised forces?

[GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS

From: "Tom B" <kaladorn@g...>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:10:38 -0400
Subject: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lJoh
n Atkinson made me think (not a new thing) about how one should
represent
things like the Buffalo, Nyala, Gelandenwagen and various other sorts of
uparmoured, IED and small arms resistant vehicles in SG2 and DS2.

John mentioned armour level 2. That should let you shrug IAVRs and small
arms as well as reasonable IEDs (at least insofar as you may get an
M-kill,
but not a crew or passenger kill). Most IEDs would then constitute a
non-penetrating hit.

I'm guessing an IED (typical) might be D12 impact vs. armour. Hits are
probably automatic for command detonated ones (wire connection). Bigger
ones
could be used. I'll assume the one used in the Palestinian area to
pulverize
a Merkava was a lot larger (even through the weaker bottom armour).

If the IED does not penetrate, it should have a higher than standard
chance
to score non-penetrating suspension hits (aka M-kills). I'm not sure
what a
fair % might be - John, Oerjan, anyone? I'm also not sure how often
you'd
get Firer Systems Down or other firecontrol effects from an IED.

Here is one place where Grav vehicles with generators inside the hull
armour
look much better....

TomB
-- 
"Now, I go to spread happiness to the rest of the station. It is a
terrible
responsibility but I have learned to live with it."
Londo, A Voice in the Wilderness, Part I

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like
administering medicine to the dead." -- Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine


Prev: Re: [GZG] GEVs Next: Re: [GZG] Subject: Re: What are the pitfalls of standardised forces?