Re: [GZG] [DSII] Precision Strike

[Oerjan Ariander <oerjan.ariander@xxxxxxxxx>]

John Atkinson wrote:

> > IIRC the Taifun uses a HEAT warhead which needs to be extremely close to
> > than as GMS/(H or bigger), you prevent all three of them from having any
> > effect at all during its attack (ADS could shoot it down *before*
> > attacking, but not *while* attacking). Was this intentional?
>
> I don't think reactive armor will have quite the same effect on a 20kg
> warhead as on a smaller warhead.

DS2's model of RA vs HEAT is actually pretty good, at least for those HEATs 
which don't negate the RA completely - and, of course, for those RAs which 
are designed to negate the advanced HEAT warheads' RA-negating ability <g>

What happens when you increase the size of a HEAT warhead is essentially 
that you increase the length of the jet that causes the penetration. 
However, the longer the jet is the more there is for the RA to disrupt; so 
if the HEAT is affected at all by the particular type of RA carried by the 
target, the effect of the RA is to reduce the HEAT's normal penetration by 
a roughly fixed percentage. The remaining percentage of the HEAT's normal 
penetration then goes on to attack the target's main armour. This is 
exactly the effect you get from DS2's "RA reduces the chit validity of HEAT 
warheads" mechanic - though DS2 is a bit old-fashioned regarding what types 
of attack RA can protect against.

> Besides which, if I were redesigning DSIII I'd ditch reactive armor
> all together.  Given the percentage of modern first-line ATGM systems
> with dual warheads and/or top attack capabilities, I don't see that as
> still being viable in a couple centuries.

DS3 needs to be *designed* before you can start *re*designing it...

I would not ditch RA altogether - unfortunately, since its demise would 
certainly make my real-world job a lot easier! Given the amount of work and 
resources being poured into designing improved types of RA (both explosive 
and otherwise) which can defeat tandem warheads and other HEAT 
improvements, the rather uncomfortable (for me, anyway) amount of success 
some of those efforts have achieved already, and also the effect modern RAs 
have on kinetic penetrators - both APFSDS and long-range EFP slugs like 
those fired from SADARM or BONUS "MAK-style" artillery rounds - I'd be 
quite surprised (though very relieved) to see the reactive armours going 
out of business anytime soon. They'll stay in DS3... though they probably 
won't have quite the effects veteran DS2 players might expect from them :-/

> I could see letting PDS shoot it down, though.  How about we cost the
> warhead as a Heavy MAK round, but resolve effects as a larger GMS/H?

Something like that. If you want to use the standard PDS-vs-GMS to-hit 
resolution rather than invent some new way for PDS to engage what is 
essentially an oversized GMS, you'll need to assign a Quality rating to the 
Taifun - either the operator's Quality, in which case the "Heavy MAK" cost 
works, or if you assume the Taifun to have a limited attack-run-only 
autonomy a separate fixed Quality in which case it'd be easier to use the 
GMS/H costs.

> > The purely tactical ADS systems normally present on the DS2 table have
> > pitifully short weapon ranges compared even to today's equally purely
> > tactical SPAAGs, and even less compared to today's MANPADS and
> > vehicle-mounted SAMs.
>
> Yeah, I know.  I already wrote a list of things I think need to be
> done to revamp the Air Defense system in DSIII.

Yes, I saw that one... it was remarkably similar to the list I wrote a 
couple of years ago :-)

Regards,

Oerjan
oerjan.ariander@xxxxxxxxx

"Life is like a sewer.
 What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
-Hen3ry

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l