Dirtside II rules eval

Chen-Song Qin quoted:

>Dirtside II rules eval
>System weak points
>1)	Direct fire
>	A)	Damage vs armor values does not scale: Nonlinear
	I believe that a weapon of a given size will overcome armour of
equivalent
level.

>		Mean damage per draw is in excess of 1.5
	I make it 1.6 counting chits alone, and assuming 100%
effectiveness.

>		Must be reduced to 1.0 or less.
	That's their opinion :-). My dice system is possibly comparable
to this.
<Snip Table>

>	B)	Infantry too hard to kill? It is almost impossible to
kill power armor
without DFFGs or SLAM.
	Use Heavy APSWs rules available on my site. Also, I find twin
APSW mounted
on jeep equivalents very effective. With Twin HAPSW, they are extremely
effective!

>	C)	ATGMs too good vs armor. For example, the GMS/H is a
class 5 warhead
(mean damage is 7.5pts) and is almost unsurvivable.
	Shoot GMS down with PDS or confuse it with ECM. Use terrain or
smoke to
block GMS. Put smoke on top of GMS launchers so they can't fire. Unlike
most modern smoke, DSII smoke blocks line of sight for every passive
sensor
and possible active sensors as well. DSII GMS model the most advanced
Western nation ATGM, rather than old Soviet ATGM.

>2)	Artillery
>	A)	Effectiveness is vastly raised by silly system.
	A better system, in my humble opinion (IMHO), is on my site.

>	Rounds should probably land after movement is completed.
	Landing after the opponent's next activation seems reasonable
given that
the complete turn is around fifteen minutes. I prefer about five to ten
minutes per complete turn, but even then it still seems reasonable.

>	Predicted fire by grid on the map sheet?
	An advanced system using points of interest (POI) is available
on my web
site.

>	B)	Kills armor too easily.
>	Armored vehicles should be very hard to kill with arty.
	Artillery fires bomblets and models FASCAM closely, except for
the mine
part afterwards. Keep armour speadout to force opponent to select open
sheath patterns or big artillery batteries. Keep out of line of sight of
artillery spotters.

>	Mean modern damage is 144 rounds per AIFV (Bn 6 - 8*3*6).
	Using Copperhead or Strix, the perfect rate is one weapon per
target.

>	C)	Excessively ineffective on infantry.
>	Infantry is the primary target for artillery.
>	A battery 1 on moving infantry should result in really high
casualties.
	Using HEF is 75% effective versus infantry targets. I really
think that's
effective enough! Or use closed sheaf to get multiple chit draws.
Remember
that infantry targets draw an extra chit more than normal.

>	D)	Range Problems: Light artillery of the type that is
described would
typically have a range of maybe 6-9km.
	Modern artillery gets longer and longer range as the years pass
by. 6Km
converts to 60 inches on the table top, or 5', the short side of a big
table. 9Km is 90 inches or 7' 6" or 6" shorter than the long side of a
big
table. So assuming artillery can hit anywhere on the table works well
with
me, as we all know that artillery range generally increases with time.

>	E)	Counter Battery: CBR data goes into main data system,
usable by
anyone, not just one fire unit.
	Using my slight changes to DSII artillery spotting available on
my web
site, CBR information is available for all artillery batteries, and
aerospace strikes as well.

>3)	Command and control
>	A)	Morale effects ineffective and pointless: Scale to
company?
>	B)	Morale effects are limited to one platoon.
	With all soldiers having access to the same information (through
advanced
HUDs and so on), fear of the unknown becomes less effective. When the
soldiers can see that all they need to do is hold their position, they
become more braver, so morale problems would tend to stay within a
platoon.
Of course this is my own opinion.

>	C)	Typically it is destroyed before it suffers from adverse
effects.
	Have bigger units, so they can suffer morale effects.

>	D)	In reality, loss of a single platoon will normally stop
an attacking
company.
	That's because in a modern unit, the other platoons won't know
what's
happening. In a DSII unit, the other platoons notice that one platoon is
"gone", but that the attackers have made their attack and can be easily
counter-attacked now.
									
       
>4)	ADA								
	       
>	A)	MANPAD systems range is shorter than current modern
stuff by lots.
Effective range should be 3km or LOS.
	The DSII LAD defence more correctly models a .50 cal MG. A
missile variant
would be something like GMS/L with 100% effectiveness, range tabletop or
line of sight, probably drawing one chit for damage.

>	B)	Mobile ADA systems have a lot of range, greater than the
3.6km. 8km
would be more reasonable.
	The DSII ZAD/ADS systems model twin 20 - 50mm autocannon, not a
missile
system. My site contains rules for putting in virtually any weapon into
turret and converting it to ZAD/ADS systems. I've even got theater air
defence systems!

>5)	The objective markers being placed by the defender makes no
sense.
>	A)	The objective is not determined by the defender, but by
the attacker.
>	B)	The defender may guess what the attackers objective is,
but won't
know.
>	C)	The attackers objective may or may not be related to
scenario victory.
	Both sides play objective markers, so they know what's important
to their
own side, while they can guess what their opponent believes is valuable.
I
think that fixes this non-problem.
									
>Relatively minor stuff.
>6)	Opportunity Fire rules do not allow overwatch.
	That's right. But the rules Jon posted, some time back on this
list, are
on my site, adapted to fit DSII.

>7)	Unit integrity rules are too rigid. See 6.
	Units operate together, platoons provide overwatch.

>8)	You cannot effectively clear mines with arty. It just doesn't
work.
	I too agree with this. It's really easy to make adopt the house
rule that
artillery DOESN'T clear minefields, so as to match your own view of
reality.

Andrew Martin
Al.Bri@xtra.co.nz
http://members.xoom.com/AndrewMartin/
Online @ 33,600 Baud!