RE: was: PDS vs. IAVR/LAW/SMAW/etc.

Your point is valid.

There are a number of house rules that you could employ to address your
point (apply ONE, not all).
1) Allow the ADS to fire with full effectiveness against all missiles
targeted against the ADS vehicle. If the ADS is also protecting other
vehicles, count all missiles attacking the ADS vehicle as THE FIRST
missile
for calculating the diminishing returns for protecting other vehicles.
2) Force PDS to have diminishing returns. This may make missiles too
effective. If this is done, I would also suggest limiting the number of
times a missile system may fire by making it ammo dependant and costing
out
the missile ammo (like artillery).
3) Change the rule from "This (die) type is reduced by one for every
extra
missile above the first..." to "This (die) type is reduced by one for
every
element, that is targeted by missiles, that the ADS is defending...". 
This
applies the penalty per extra missile target rather than per extra
missile.

I understand the diminishing returns rule for the ADS. The ADS should be
less efficient providing protection for multiple vehicles against
multiple
missiles. 

What makes the ADS so big and expensive is the ability to cover more
than
just itself.

And remember that the diminishing effect due to multiple missiles is a
per-attacking-unit penalty. If unit A fires 3 missiles at unit X,
protected
by superior ADS, the ADS gets to roll a d6 for each missile. If then
unit B
fires 2 missiles at unit X, still protected by the superior ADS, the ADS
get
to roll a d8 for each missile.

-----
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net
http://members.xoom.com/rlyehable/ds2/	    
-----

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Bilderback [SMTP:bbilderback@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 2:34 AM
> To:	gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Subject:	Re: PDS vs. IAVR/LAW/SMAW/etc.
> 
> I'm sorry, let me clarify. The only thing I really find wrong with the
> rule 
> is that while a big, powerful ADS system can only defend against a
limited
> 
> number of missiles, even when they're coming RIGHT AT IT, little PDS
can, 
> according to the rules, stop an unlimited number of incoming attacks.
YOur
> 
> arguements are all valid, but hsouldn't the PDS suffer similar
> limitations?
> 
> Brian B
> 
>