Re: [SG and DSII] Question about Infantry Walkers

At 01:14 PM 10/29/98 +1300, you wrote:
>Owen Glover <oglover@mov.vic.gov.au> wrote:
>>Using the Armour Class1 all round would seem more reasonable;
>>otherwise PA with AC1 ie d12 all round are better protected
>>than the Walkers!?
>    With AC:1 at the front, walkers are immune to anti-infantry
weaponry.
>With AC:0 at the sides, they have the same protection as a powered
armour
>team, 5 valid damage points to kill with anti-infantry weaponry.
Therefore,
>in the standard DSII rules, infantry walkers are be protected than a PA
>team.

Except that PA cannot be targeted by GMS systems - the scourge of 
lightly armoured vehicles. My experience with armour 1 vehicles is 
that they very rarely survive any direct fire hits. PA on the other
hand seems remarkably resistant to AT weapons. I would take a 
platoon of PA over a platoon of IW anyday (provided the PA had 
at least _some_ AT capability).

>Andrew Martin
>-------------
>Shared email: Al.Bri@xtra.co.nz
>Web Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/
>Blind See-Saw Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/SEE-SAW/
>Dirtside II Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/DSII/
>Dirtside II FAQ: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/DSII/FAQ/
>GZG E-Mail FAQ:
> http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/DSII/FAQ/Ettiquette.html
>FUDGE GM Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/FUDGE/
>Usagi Yoyimbo Site: http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/UY/
>
>
>
>
       Tony Christney
       acc@questercorp.com

  "If the end user has to worry about how the program was 
   written then there is something wrong with that program"
				  -Bjarne Stroustrup