Prev: RE: 25mm Grav Bikes and Rules Next: Re: Infantry Walkers!

Re: Infantry Walkers!

From: Kenneth Winland <kwinland@c...>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 01:54:02 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Infantry Walkers!


On Thu, 19 Nov 1998, Thomas Barclay wrote:

> Personally, I think they are a bit unlikely. It is hard to make a 
> mech walk. It wastes previous space for servos and delicate gyros and 
> control systems, so pound for pound they'd always be weaker than a 
> vehicle without these glitzy componenets. They seem like a 
> maintenance nightmare (imagine logistics if every squad had one). 
> They seem like they'd have to be complex and expensive and prone to 
> problems relative to simpler designs. 

	I have to agree with your points...  But I still love 'em. <g>
For me, they are very SF.

> OTOH, If you have PA, they make sense. And they could fill a useful 
> tactical role. Mark me down as luke warm. 

	Our games are so hard on vehicles, it is hard for me to gauge
walker's value.  I *think* they are keen in a tactical sense, given
certain terrain and tactical perameters.  But I am still figuring them

> Like most things, it is not the tool, but the deployment that 
> determines the effectiveness.


> In my big con scenario, one side had a wheeled TD with HKP and an 
> ATST combat walker with HEL/2s. The other side had four aliens APCs 
> with DFFG/1 and SAW and two aliens gunships with SLAM/3, RFAC/1 and 
> GMS/H. By the end of the battle, 1 APC (with infantry inside), both 
> VTOLs and the TD and the Walker were all slagged. 3 APCs were still 
> standing. I think in an even battle, where people aggressively use 
> their vehicles, they will be expended. If it is an unfair battle, he 
> on the powerful side may take less casualties....

	My bet is on those gunships!  Ouch!



Prev: RE: 25mm Grav Bikes and Rules Next: Re: Infantry Walkers!