Re: Variant PDAF/ADAF Rules

Mike Miserendino wrote:

> Interesting, but I prefer to keep using these weapons against fighter
and
> missiles only.  It just seems that giving a PDAF/ADAF the damage
capability
> of major weapons(taking hull damage or rolling for a threshold) seems
less
> realistic.
> 
> Mike Miserendino

Comparing PDAF and ADAF to modern day weapons they would be the same as
Phalanx (or Goalkeeper) for point, and SAM for area defense. In Harpoon
(modern naval combat) these systems can both be used in anti-ship roles.
They haven't got a long range or do a lot of damage, but it works. So I
see no reason why not to use this variant rules, if you want to.

BTW: When the Argentines invaded South Georgia (Falklands war), Royal
marines engaged an Argentine Frigate with small arms and AT weapons. The
frigate had to pull back after having its 100mm gun knocked out by two
LAW hits, being hit in the waterline by a Carl Gustav round and another
round hitting its missile launcher! They also downed a Puma and damaged
an Alouette III.

How about a rule letting the marine contingent of a ship ride on the
outside, and engaging enemy ships and fighters<g>?

Ludo