Re: GMS Fire control

Adrian spake thusly upon matters weighty: 

> Problem - if the EW tech of the enemy is greater than your ability to
> resist it, maybe they'll be able to screw up these missiles even
before
> they're fired.  SO, you might incorporate a "low tech" manual guidance
> system into the launcher (much miniaturized over today's, of course),
so if
> the soldiers know the enemy is spoofing their "smart" systems, they
can
> turn it on "dumb" mode and guide the missiles themselves.  Of course,
the
> accuracy will suffer and likelyhood of return fire hurting the gunner
will
> increase, but at least systems would keep operating...
 
> Game Effect:	You get enhanced or superior guidance for your missiles,
but
> EW equipped enemy can attempt to jam missile systems (their EW vs.
your
> guidance) - if they do, you only get basic fire control...

But how do you JAM in the middle of someone else's turn? (I forget, 
are you just allowed to spend your EW chits, .... I guess you must to 
jam someone else's comms). 
 
I think that you might Implement the following:
Any GMS that has a target lock and have been fired 
may be 'Jammed' by the expenditure of an EW chit. (Of course, counter 
jamming may be applied). Roll EW equipment quality versus GMS FC. If 
EW roll is higher, then GMS is jammed. If the EW roll is more than 
TWICE the GMS roll, lock is lost and the round goes ballistic. 
Otherwise, a jammed missile uses two shifts lower fire control. (Down 
to D4 mimimum).    

Also. launcher suppression may be applied. In this case, an EW chit 
is spent and put beside a target launching unit. That unit is being 
point-jammed. Thereafter, a unit MUST attempt lock on versus even 
ground targets (roll Quality vs ECM) before launch (as if engaging an 
air unit) and any engagements versus air units make the lock on check 
already required two die shifts harder (this is an open shift). Of 
course, an enemy EW chit can be spent to counter the point jamming.

Here is another thought for EW systems:
Primitive System: 1 chit
Basic System: 2 chits
Enhanced System: 3 chits
Superior System: 4 chits
Advanced System: 5 chits

Gives your Kra-Vak with Advanced EW a scary capability. 

> I really like the idea of a single launcher being able to fire
different
> types of targets.  The warheads/seeker system could be interchangable
(with
> common rocket motor, guidance fins, etc.), and you just attach an
anti-tank
> warhead or anti-aircraft warhead prior to launching.	

Well, probably not that - AT weapons need less speed and less range. 
But interchangeable missiles are good (the AT version is larger and 
warhead, the AA version has more fuel). 
 
> Game Effect:	You determine how many of each type of system your
gunners
> are carrying prior to the game.  For example, operators of GMS/P
systems in
> SG2 presently carry (commonly) only 3 missiles.  You could say they
have
> three rockets, but five warheads - three anti-armour and two anti-air.
> This gives the grunts a chance to shoot back with guided missile fire
at
> aircraft units.

I just make them choose the types of their three rockets. I let 
loader figures without a heavy weapon carry up to five more shots.
 
> FYI:	I've heard of development efforts toward this kind of system in
"real
> life" anyway - so it isn't too far off.  The Canadian military deploys
a
> system called ADATS, which is a guided missile weapon designed for
both
> anti-armour and anti-air use.

NOT man portable, and not very good at air and ground engagements. 
Definitely Multi Role GMS.

  I believe it has a scanning radar for
> initial target aquisition (in anti-air mode) but uses a laser for
actual
> targeting when the missiles fire, even in the anti-air role.	My
friend's
> cousin is a Warrent Officer in the Regiment that operates these
things, and
> we heard that in a recent deployment with the US Marines, the ADATS
system
> was able to shoot down things like cruise missiles, etc.

Cruise are slow and big for a missile. Rifles have shot down cruise 
missiles I believe. AA guns surely have. 

  The range on the
> system is between local air defence like the Stinger and long-range
air
> defence like the Patriot, and they are mounted on armoured vehicles.

LAD or ZAD type weapon.

  The
> US was one of the original development partners of the system, but
they
> backed out years ago.  I think the Marines want to get it, because it
fills
> a real gap in US air defense.  It kicks ass on tanks, too...

Fairly good vs. Armour. GDWs Twilight 2000 had good info on this 
system.
 
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay		     
Voice: (613) 831-2018 x 4009
Fax: (613) 831-8255

 "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot.  C++ makes
 it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg."
 -Bjarne Stroustrup
**************************************************/