Re: [ds] Modern Tanks.

Thomas Anderson wrote:
>Andrew wrote:
>>     Well, I've been thinking about 120mm guns. And, even though in
recent
>> posts, I've suggested that 120mm guns are size 5, I'm now thinking
that
>> modern western 120mm guns are size 6 HVC with HKP range.
>could you explain your logic here?
    Just trying to match DSII game scale with real world weapon
capabilities. See also Tom Clancy's "Armoured Cavalry" book.

>why? if western fc is the best, make it Superior and only let everyone
>else have Basic.
    Fire control is opposed with signature and terrain, not opponent's
fire
control. Tom Clancy and several writers with experience on M1 tanks
usually
quote 95% accuracy. In the Gulf war battle of 73 Easting, quoted by
Tom Clancy, seems to indicate a one shot, one kill rate. OpFor in the
NTC in
the US, also quoted by Tom Clancy, again seems to confirm this. Tom
Clancy
also quotes US troops in Iraq as saying the Iraqis were just like OpFor
but
a lot easier!

>i'm not too happy about the stealth. is an m1a1 actually harder to hit
>than a 60-tonne tank from a less-developed army?
    I'm uncertain. The very few M1s that were hit by Iraqi T72's were
apparently undamaged. I don't know how true this is, but Tom Clancy
quotes
that it took another M1 to penetrate the turret armour of a M1. Even
then,
the tank had its turret replaced and was back in action very soon.
    I regard stealth in DSII, not as a electronic stealth field, but as
more
an efficiency factor to pack more gear in a given volume.

>>     I've assumed that you can spend spare capacity on improving
armour
>> level. As a rough guide, using CP equal to front armour level
increases
>> front armour level by one. This would cost about 1-2 points per CP
used.
>
>how about cp equal to vehicle size class can be used to improve one
facing
>by one level? in the case of modern tanks, it might be the top or back,
as
>they have quite good armour all round.
    I prefer using the existing armour level rather than the vehicle
size.
Spending CP equal to the face's existing armour level allows a one step
improvement in armour level.
    I would also allow moving armour levels around between faces. For
example, moving, say, one level of top armour to front armour.

>how about this for the generic mbt: size 4 (20 cp), armour 4 size 6 gun
in
>turret (18), your choice of extra apsw (1), another extra apsw (1),
apfc
>(1). less advanced countries lose out on fire control or only get level
3
>armour.
    You could do it this way, but this doesn't allow for light tanks
that
would fit in at size 4. Or large armoured cars at size 3. Also, the US
Marines AAV7 is definitely a size 5 vehicle.
    I personally wouldn't allow APFC charges for any modern vehicles in
DSII. Except, possible for one Russian T90 tank variant, which I believe
has
active armour. I think you meant reactive armour.

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/