Re: Dirtside II FMA Enhancement.

[snip]
>Anyways I am looking forward to input on this post, I'd like to hear
the
>comments, criticisms, compliments, paytests,ect. of those other than
Andrew
>and myself, I feel as though we are the only two that play DS2 or want
a
>dice impact system. I would really like to hear from someone at GZG so
we
>can better get a handle on the spirit of the rules (Other than have a
good
>time), I think that we are getting down to the point where which hair
we
>split and where might be better defined by the originaly intended
effect of
>the rules.

Well, I've been skimming through all this as it is posted (and saving
some
bits for more detailed reading and consideration later), but I do have a
few comments.
1) While I realise some players simply don't like it on principle, the
chit
system WORKS. Given that, why replace it with a dice-and-chart system
that
is actually MORE complicated? OK, the chits take a few seconds to draw
from
the pot, but you then have all your results right there in front of you,
end of story. The dice system proposed could, at an extreme, actually
require players to have upwards of FIFTY dice available for the game
(there
is concievably a case where both players could have to roll five each of
the same die type for a single shot).
The systems that we have been proposing and working on (posted in part
in
the "DS Lite" discussions) don't make any attempt to replicate the
chit-draw system - they replace it entirely with a dice system that is
very
much quicker and simpler, mostly single-die rolls. This is more suited
to
large, fast games where you don't want to get stuck in too much detail.
So, as far as an [OFFICIAL] line goes, our recommendation is to stick
with
the chits for detailed games, and go with a greatly-simplified dice
system
for big fast games.
Of course, none of this should stop you doing whatever you want in your
own
games - that's what it's all about!  :-)

>
>______
>Final note:
>I read someone wondering why HKPs arent effected by reactive armor.
Here's
>why:
>
>    HKP's aren't effected by reactive armor due to the fact that they
don't
>use a shaped charge. Modern Anti-Tank shaped charge weapons work 
throwing a
>cone of metal to create a hole in the armor into which the warhead
releases
>an incindary compound into the chamber behind the armor it hit (ammo
engines
>cockpit, ext.) and igniting the compund destroying the tank from the
inside
>out (Goes in like a dime, comes out like a financial institution.)
Reactive
>armor prematurely detonates the warhead before it hits the armor
protecting
>the chamber and spraying the compund over the outside of the tank where
it
>is least effective. Hyper Kenetic Penetrators are just that, giant APDU
>tipped javelins that spear the offending tank. Larger HKPs have a
delayed
>fuse explosive that detonates the javelin once it is stuck inside the
tank.
>Reactive armor dosen't detonate the javelin fast enough to make it
avoid
>hitting the tank anyways, penetrating the critical armor and spearing
the
>components behind it.
>
>If anyone at GZG disagrees with my PSB I'd like to know.

This was pretty much the intention. The HKP is inspired by the similar
weapon in one of the later Slammers' books, an osmium penetrator round
propelled by a plasma charge in the gun! The idea is that Reactive
armour,
designed to disrupt HEAT rounds (as above) won't have much effect on a
solid shot kinetic penetrator. Whether this is correct or PSB, I'm sure
several people will tell us!

Jon (GZG)