Prev: Another dumbass Q Next: Re: Another dumbass Q

Re: Variant PDAF/ADAF Rules

From: Niko Mikkanen <creator@c...>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 07:55:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Variant PDAF/ADAF Rules

On Fri, 15 Nov 1996, Mike Miserendino wrote:

> Tim Guay 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
> >>of major weapons(taking hull damage or rolling for a threshold)
seems less
> >>realistic.
> >>
> >>
> >Then you haven't seen the what twin 40 mm could do to a destroyer.
> I was thinking of the 12" armor belt of a battleship.  P'Ting, P'Tang
> scratch some mighty fine looking grey paint.	It just comes across as
> unrealistic to have the possiblity of some pea shooter on a scout do
> damage as a major weapon.
> Mike Miserendino

	Then again, in a gane of Harpoon we played a few years back, USS
Iowa was hit by 20 or Russian anti-ship missiles (can't remember which
type). The ship lost 350 of it's 880 hit points, but it was still far
sinking. What DID happen, however, was that every single radar and gun
control system aboard the ship was destroyed/damaged. Even the
with the 12" armor belt has it's weak spots.

Niko "GNiko" Mikkanen	(
"Now all we've gotta do is find the secret passage, rescue the professor
	and save the world"    -    "No sweat. This way."
	-Attack of the Killer Tomatoes, the Cartoon Series

Prev: Another dumbass Q Next: Re: Another dumbass Q