RE: ground combat and bombardment

It comes down to what level of abstraction you want.  You can use a 5:1
or
10:1 scale to reduce the die rolls, but this would depend on the scale
of
the conflict.

For campaign play, my usual method of representing planets is to use a
MT
Sa'vasku ship using 1/2 PF results to allow for the lack of thrust.  It
works surprisingly well, especially when each point of damage you do to
the
planet means you have to pay to 'fix' the damage you just did to the
infrastructure after it's conquered...

'Neath Southern Skies - http://users.mcmedia.com.au/~denian/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: GBailey@aol.com [SMTP:GBailey@aol.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 1999 11:56 PM
> 
> I like it, except for a  couple of things.
> 1) 1 mass = 1 CF doesn't distinguish having armor units.
> 2) Rolling beam dice per CF means lots and lots and lots of dice.  
> Did I say enough 'lots'?  Maybe having 5 mass = 1 CF would be better.
> 
> Now what would be a "hardened" lander?  One drawback would be having
> streamlined transports just land on the planet.  Treat each 'PDS' on
the
> planet as a class-1 beam when firing at landing ships?  Heck, not PDS,
but
> specialized class-1 beams that cannot fire out of the atmosphere. 
Against
> regular landers needs a 5-6, drop troops/hardened landers needs a 6,
roll
> normally against landing ships.  Let's call them, um, Planetary
Defense
> Batteries (PDB).
> Alternatively, roll each 'bombardment attack' as a PDS firing on a
> missile? 4-5 suppresses 1, 6 destroys one and suppresses one with a
> reroll.
> 
> Glen