Re: [SG2] Vehicle Questions...

>Allan Goodall wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 05 Jan 1999 15:39:40 -0800, John Leary
<john_t_leary@pronetusa.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >The thing that needs to be resolved in
>> >this case is: What is PA?
>> >	 If PA is infantry, treat it as infantry.   If PA is a
vehicle/s,
>> >treat it as a vehicle/s.
>>
>> Well, it's Powered Armour... it's infantry in big suits.
>>
>> The problem, as Tom pointed out, is that the system doesn't handle
multiple
>> Support Weapons well... This is definitely a failing of the system.
>>
>> Allan Goodall		  agoodall@interlog.com
>
>     To restate the case, or use a different point of view:
>
>If PA is infantry, then it should use an infantry TOE and will not
>have multiple support weapons in the unit.   Problem solved!

No...Problem definately _not_ solved.  This is not a generalized
solution.
To say that an infantry TOE _cannot_ have multiple support weapons is
silly.	To say that an infantry TOE modeled after a particular 'source'
(be
it modern infantry structure, or one in a book you read) _does not_ have
multiple support weapons is fine.  Is the distiction clear?  Now if
people
can explain an effective, rational system that provides a generalized
solution, great.  If you can give a good explanation of how the existing
structure handles this case effectively and generally, great. 
Handwaving
and arbtrarily stating that infantry TOE could not have multiple support
weapons is not.

>If PA is armor, then each PA trooper is 'driving' a one man armored
>vehicle, and has a main weapon on the vehicle that can be fired at
>any selected target.	Each trooper/vehicle can fire on any available
>target in range, and each attack is a seperate attack from a different
>vehicle in the unit.	Problem solved!

This is potentially a reasonable solution - perhaps moreso for some
backgrounds than others, but I still think an effective system for
resolving multiple support weapons is best.

>I fully realize the heritical nature of the concept: PA is a vehicle.
>If the PA fits, drive it.

Good one <g>

:-)
Bye for now,
John L.