Prev: Re: FMA Aircraft: Guns Next: Re: OFFICIAL - GZG: Vacuum and zero/low gravity combat…?

Re: FMA Aircraft: Guns

From: Damond Walker <damosan@g...>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 20:46:52 -0500
Subject: Re: FMA Aircraft: Guns

In the rules, as written, a "near miss" can be a very light hit or
whizzing past the cockpit.  The end result is that the aircraft is
in what I call a Disadvantaged State with the defender getting a -1
to their quality die until he/she get their sh*t together.  This
a number of things: the pilot is jinking the aircraft wildly, maybe some
light damage tweaks the flight model for a bit and it takes the pilot
working the stick to get things under control, who knows.

During their next activation the pilot must burn an action to negate the

This kind of aligns with Jon's comment.

As far as cannon go - yeah I get it.  FMAS mechanics of old gave weapons
firepower rating to represent the amount of lead they could put into the
air and impact or the amount of damage they can cause if a target was
Impact would then be rolled against the target's armor.

In the aircraft case, and especially with the Mig example, the rate of
fire, shell drop, and speed of the cannon rounds were wildly different. 
point with the earlier message is that the dual 23mm and 37mm didn't
necessarily converge at the same point.  So at close range the Impact
should probably reflect the target getting stomped with 37mm shells.  At
longer range perhaps the 37mm rounds had already dropped too far but the
23mm rounds were just hitting convergence.  In game terms this means
Impact would be reduced.


On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 6:37 PM, John Leary via Gzg <>

> Problem 1: In air to air combat (guns)  there is not such thing a a
> miss'.
> It is either hit or miss,  Missiles are almost always a near miss,
> of them as
> smart flak.
> Problem 2: Cannon damage is not related to range, it is a product of
> explosive
> in the shell.  A long range hit from the 37mm will produce the same
> as a short range hit. Less probability of a hit with the 37mm at
> range..
> Bye for now,
> John L.
> <IO
> On Tuesday, February 2, 2016 2:24 PM, Damond Walker
> wrote:
> Hey All,
> So I've written up a set of rules using the FMA mechanics for air
> and I plan to play test them a bit Friday evening.  I've written them
> assuming Mach capable aircraft from the 70s onward though they can
> be used with prop driven aircraft or early jets.
> I'm looking at two philosophies for determining an aircraft's
> and impact for any guns mounted on the platform.
> #1: Throw a quality die and firepower die for each pair of guns.  Take
> highest two results and compare them to the target's die roll (which
> quality & defense die -- high value is used).  Beat 1 is a near miss
> beating 2 is a solid hit.  For example a Korean War Sabre has six .50
> so would throw quality and then 3 FP die.
> #2: Come up with a standard firepower & impact for the the set of guns
> be done with it -- though this approach will have several weird die
> combos.  For example a Mig-15 may have an exceptionally large Impact
die at
> close and medium range to model getting smacked by a 37mm shell but
> long range impact die will be significantly lower because of the
> drop said 37mm shell experiences.
> Psychologically players will probably enjoy #1 as it's a bucket of
> and their odds of getting a decent result go up tremendously.  From a
> speed-of-play perspective I like #2 and will probably lean that way.
> Opinions?
> D.

Prev: Re: FMA Aircraft: Guns Next: Re: OFFICIAL - GZG: Vacuum and zero/low gravity combat…?