Re: [FT] Alternate Core Systems

> On Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:15:32 -0500 , "Izenberg, Noam"
> <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> 
> >A long time ago, someone generated alternate, less catastrophic rules
for
> >Core Systems. Someone else (Jared?) came up with an alternate _set_
of core
> >systems altogether. A rudimentary look hasn't turned up either. Can
anyone
> >point me to them or send them to me?

Mark Kochte posted one of the alternative, less catastrophic Core System
rules (in case you do a search for it ... assuming
the archives are still searchable).  It was Daryl Poe's adaptation,
and having used it once or twice I recall the following:

Communications Hit (telephone symbol): The ship now fires LAST of all
vessels, due to the fact that it cannot coordinate fire with it's
sister ships.

Navigation/Computer Hit (computer symbol): The ship leaves a blank
line for it's next order phase AND writes orders for one turn in 
advance.  Every order writing phase it writes orders for one turn
in advance.  Should this be repaired, orders written in advance may
be rewritten on the next orders phase.

I'm drawing a blank on the third one :-(

It might be on Mark's website, but I'm drawing a blank on
where that is.

DarylL
From - Wed Dec 06 17:41:09 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA32452;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:51:26 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB4HoYj70602;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:50:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 4 Dec
2000 09:50:29 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB4HoS370581
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:50:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:DDz5gv8RRiEmBJb2ZexmzPRDixpgwxwt@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB4HoQP70576
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:50:27
-0800 (PST)
Received: from stsci.edu (tnm.stsci.edu [130.167.1.235])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with SMTP id
eB4HoQf84787
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:50:26 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from kochte@stsci.edu)
Received: by stsci.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4-DNI-8.0)
	id MAA20302; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:50:24 -0500
Received: from poppc.stsci.edu(130.167.236.100) by tnm.stsci.edu via
smtp-stsci
 (V2.1)
	id xma020297; Mon, 4 Dec 00 12:50:08 -0500
Received: from stsci.edu by poppc (8.8.8+Sun/SMI-SVR4)
	id MAA24953; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:50:00 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <3A2BD97D.2DED5AB3@stsci.edu>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 12:50:53 -0500
From: Indy <kochte@stsci.edu>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (WinNT; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [FT] Alternate Core Systems
References: <200012041739.eB4HdOQ81440@io.frii.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de000006de

Daryl Lonnon wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:15:32 -0500 , "Izenberg, Noam"
> > <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >A long time ago, someone generated alternate, less catastrophic
rules for
> > >Core Systems. Someone else (Jared?) came up with an alternate _set_
of cor
e
> > >systems altogether. A rudimentary look hasn't turned up either. Can
anyone
> > >point me to them or send them to me?
> 
> Mark Kochte posted one of the alternative, less catastrophic Core
System
> rules (in case you do a search for it ... assuming
> the archives are still searchable).  It was Daryl Poe's adaptation,
> and having used it once or twice I recall the following:
>
[...]
> 
> It might be on Mark's website, but I'm drawing a blank on
> where that is.

Right here! :-)

http://www.bcpl.net/~indy/full-thrust/core-systems.html

Mk
From - Wed Dec 06 17:41:09 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA02071;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:02:17 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB4I0TJ70720;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:00:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 4 Dec
2000 10:00:28 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB4I0Rl70699
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:00:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:UWxWDWGUc56X4nLsUxw3vSfkP5SSZK/+@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB4I0QP70694
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:00:26
-0800 (PST)
Received: from io.frii.com (io.frii.com [216.17.128.3])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB4I0Pf86908
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:00:25 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from dlonnon@io.frii.com)
Received: (from dlonnon@localhost)
	by io.frii.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) id eB4I0Pd81838
	for gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:00:25 -0700
(MST)
From: Daryl Lonnon <dlonnon@frii.com>
Message-Id: <200012041800.eB4I0Pd81838@io.frii.com>
Subject: Re: [FT] Salvo Missile Range
In-Reply-To: <200012031102.MAA03837@d1o902.telia.com> from Oerjan Ohlson
at "Dec
 3, 2000 11:46:04 am"
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:00:25 -0700 (MST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL68 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de000006df

[Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> Peter Mancini wrote:
> 
> >Well the obvious answer is to just be more physics correct and give
> >anything launched from a ship (fighters included) the same vector as
> >the ship.  The SRM's then would, relatively speaking, see the launch
> >vehicle as standing still (assuming no ACC or direction change).
> > 
> >Of course this is a fundamental change to the way the game is
>played,
> but with FT3 coming out, perhaps it is a necessary one?
> 
> <sigh> This only about the fifth time I've seen this one suggestion
> come up in this thread, and it is just as disastrous for game balance
> now as it was on the previous occasions.

It keeps coming up because from a reality perspective the way it works
now is so broken, and the fix seems so easy.  People play vector, in
part, because it feels more like "realistic" space combat.  But it 
doesn't with regards to missiles and fighters, since they move
non-newtonian.

But you are right, the simple fix will lead to balance problems, where
the ship with the biggest thrust will have an even larger advantage than
they normally enjoy in vector.

My question is, is there a way to fix it, retaining a pseudo
newtonian feel throughout the game?

My first thought, is that if high vector passes for missiles and
fighters are a problem, make them less attractive.

Measure the distance between the end points of the each vector, for
each 8" in seperation, subtract one from the die to hit. 

Justification: Missiles/Fighters don't have the size to carry the
massive computers required to deal with targeting during high
vector passes.

Any other thoughts?

DarylL who likes the idea of vectoring the whole game.
From - Wed Dec 06 17:41:10 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA04206;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:11:27 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB4IAvq70973;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:10:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 4 Dec
2000 10:10:56 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB4IAt170952
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:10:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:g/7WXbNx4bjxQ5Xp+cRwLJLpzsLyxA/Y@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB4IArP70947
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:10:53
-0800 (PST)
Received: from saluki-mailsmtp.siu.edu (saluki-mailsmtp.siu.edu
[131.230.252.26])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB4IArf88963
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:10:53 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from jdarnold@siu.edu)
Received: from [131.230.92.52] (mac52.biochem.siu.edu [131.230.92.52])
	by saluki-mailsmtp.siu.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA41692
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:08:21 -0600
Message-Id: <200012041808.MAA41692@saluki-mailsmtp.siu.edu>
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410)
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 12:11:04 -0600
Subject: Re: Winter War 28
From: "Joseph Arnold" <jdarnold@siu.edu>
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Mime-version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de000006e0

If it makes ya feel better, I'm running a SG "mini-campaign" at Egyptian

Campaign in Carbondale, Ill. 13-15 April. Carbondale is about 1 1/2
hours
from St. Louis. Shoot me an e-mail offline if interested in more detail.
Jay
PS-Don't tell the Gouge Workshop folks, but I use GW figures in un
"chapter
aproved" paint schemes, formations and rule systems! Gasp!

----------
>From: Noel Weer <nsweer@ice.net>
>To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
>Subject: Re: Winter War 28
>Date: Mon, Dec 4, 2000, 8:18 AM
>

> Thanks all for pointing out the West Coast event also.
> I guess I failed to specify that I was really hoping for something in
> the middle - say Chicago, Indianopolis, or St.Louis.
>
> There are a ton of us gamers in the vastness of this country far
removed
> from the coasts. :)
>
> Bell, Brian K wrote:
>
>> Here is the URL for GZGWCC:
>> http://www.naxera.com/gzgwcc/index.html
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Brian Bell
>> bkb@beol.net
>> -----
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Noel Weer [SMTP:nsweer@ice.net]
>>> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 6:30 PM
>>> To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
>>> Subject: Re: Winter War 28
>>>
>>> I would love to come... but RL(tm) and distances involved tend to
>>> impeded any plans along that angle. Is there ever a GZG event that
is
>>> not on the East Coast?
>>>
>>> Mark Kochte wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Noel Weer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> One SG-DSII linkage idea that had occurred to me recently came up
when
>>>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>>> few of us ran a DSII fight where the objective was for some
corporate
>>>>> mercenaries to keep the local government from seizing an office
>>>>
>>> building
>>>
>>>>> as part of their nationalization policy. The gov't troops did
achieve
>>>>> infantry control of the town and the building, but ultimately lost
the
>>>>> battle...
>>>>>
>>>>> The player controling the gov't wanted to put his troops inside
the
>>>>> building and have the mercenaries dig him out... reasonable given
that
>>>>> the mercs couldn't just blow it up...
>>>>>
>>>>> So, you could do a DSII at one table and a SG at another - the
wider
>>>>> battle for the area at the former and the fights in the halls of
the
>>>>> objective at the other. Conditions on the DSII table could
influence
>>>>> reinforcement availability on the SG, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know less about FT, but a forced landing of reinforcements from
orbit
>>>>
>>>>> could be integrated into an active DSII (or SG) fight on another
table.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is an FMA/EFSB cross-over event happening at GZG-ECC IV this
>>>> [next] year. Come and play!  :-)  (okay, so it was a badly phrased
>>>> plug for the con; come anyway! details at:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.warpfish.com/jhan/ft/gzgecc/gzgecc4/
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> Mk
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> The Middle Ages were a great time to be alive,
>>> because if you weren't wiped out by the Plague
>>> or impaled by some marauding barbarian, then yippee.
>>>	  "chocolate covered musings"
>>>	  (http://www.amused.com/nick.html)
>
>
> --
> The Middle Ages were a great time to be alive,
> because if you weren't wiped out by the Plague
> or impaled by some marauding barbarian, then yippee.
>	"chocolate covered musings"
>	(http://www.amused.com/nick.html)
> 
From - Wed Dec 06 17:41:14 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA25322;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 16:10:19 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB4M9di78254;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:09:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 4 Dec
2000 14:09:35 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB4M9XG78192
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:09:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:4BAqmxrPit5PgtDWVhIWm+5UitipdwTD@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB4M9VP78187
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:09:31
-0800 (PST)
Received: from d1o903.telia.com (root@d1o903.telia.com [195.252.34.241])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB4M9Uf37748
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:09:30 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from oerjan.ohlson@telia.com)
Received: from default (t6o903p26.telia.com [212.181.190.146])
	by d1o903.telia.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA18001
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 23:09:26 +0100
(CET)
Message-Id: <200012042209.XAA18001@d1o903.telia.com>
From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: Zombie Messages
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 19:20:18 +0100
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1157
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de000006ed

Indy wrote:

>>Also, missiles should be spoofable just as they are in real life.
> 
>RE: missiles. Isn't that spoofability already covered in their 'to
hit'
>rolls?

SMs yes; MTMs no - they don't have any 'to hit' rolls.

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry
From - Wed Dec 06 17:41:14 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA25331;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 16:10:27 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB4M9hV78275;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:09:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 4 Dec
2000 14:09:38 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB4M9ZT78215
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:09:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:ohZcQ3Kj+muGCqcifxXFwEuLST9leMuc@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB4M9XP78199
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:09:33
-0800 (PST)
Received: from d1o903.telia.com (root@d1o903.telia.com [195.252.34.241])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB4M9Wf37755
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 14:09:32 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from oerjan.ohlson@telia.com)
Received: from default (t6o903p26.telia.com [212.181.190.146])
	by d1o903.telia.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA18196
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 23:09:29 +0100
(CET)
Message-Id: <200012042209.XAA18196@d1o903.telia.com>
From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [FT] Salvo Missile Range
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 19:37:12 +0100
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1157
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de000006ec

Daryl Lonnon wrote: 

>><sigh> This only about the fifth time I've seen this one suggestion
>>[vector missiles] come up in this thread, and it is just as
disastrous >>for game balance now as it was on the previous occasions.
> 
>It keeps coming up because from a reality perspective the way it
>works now is so broken, and the fix seems so easy.

But when comes up for the fifth time in the same thread within a month
or so - OK, only the fourth time since Peter says this last one was an
accidental re-post - I'm getting a bit worried about people's
memories... Thus the <sigh> :-/

Regards,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry
From - Wed Dec 06 17:41:10 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA13937;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 12:54:12 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB4IpFa71573;
	Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:51:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 4 Dec
2000 10:51:13 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB4IpC471552
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:51:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:ERZm2z1TTdrkm0lOV163tmnThm/JX+z9@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB4IpAP71547
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:51:10
-0800 (PST)
Received: from exsrv.bitheads.com (mail.bitheads.com [64.26.142.194])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB4Ip9f96229
	for <GZG-L@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:51:10 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from tomb@bitheads.com)
Received: by host-253.bitheads.com with Internet Mail Service
(5.5.2448.0)
	id <X54KG4T5>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:51:04 -0500
Message-ID:
<417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A34CFC3@host-253.bitheads.com>
From: "Barclay, Tom" <tomb@bitheads.com>
To: "Gzg Digest (E-mail)" <GZG-L@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: [DS2] more on firecons, weapons systems
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:51:03 -0500 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de000006e1

1) Thanks for the feedback on GMS/P (Brian's web page called it GSM
systems,
but when I hear of that I think of European cellphones). I think I like
the
version that proposes it as 2400m range, 1 capacity point (unless
carried by
a team), guidance as purchased, 1 chit of red or yellow validity. It
fits
well with a very standardized progression of GMS. Other ideas from the
same
piece about oversize GMS occur to me as good substance for some SG2
conversions. 

2) Thanks for the feedback on multiple target engagements. Everyone
suggested if you wanted to have multiple weapons engaging multiple
targets,
buy multiple firecons (each as a separate turret). The case I'm thinking
of
(the Hammer's Slammers combat car) features 3 APSWs which would not
require
firecontrols since they are pintle mounted. They need more crew, but
ultimately they don't need more firecon. They should probably be able to
fire at whatever the gunner can see. Should this have a cost increase? I
think so. I think any multiple engagement system should (instead of
doing
the complex thing of buying multiple firecons) just have a charge
assessed
for that capability. This also covers multiple co-axial weapons systems
firing at more than one target in a round (firing two diverse weapons at
the
same target is probably no better than firing two of the same weapon, so
that situation isn't a big concern). Being able to engage multiple
targets
(not counting your 1 free APSW) should cost extra pointage, if you care
about point balance. 

3) We've already had a running discussion on how to implement larger
anti-armour weapons like an 84I mm RR into SG2. It strikes me this could
be
included into DS2 as well but I haven't looked at the details yet.
Anyone
done this type of a weapons system?

4) I haven't seen ideas from anyone yet on how to handle something like
a
76mm or 90mm Low Pressure Gun. HVC doesn't seem like the right model to
me.
These, if I understand correctly, are fairly dangerous to infantry,
buildings, and lightly armoured or unarmoured vehicles, but fare very
poorly
in terms of range and penetration versus real tank cannons like the HVC. 

5) Has anyone tried using SG2-ish unit quality for troops or other units
in
DS2? If so, what ranges/validities/etc did they use? In DS2, quality
doesn't
seem to be as much of an issue as in SG2. I'd like to suggest that
perhaps
it is just as important? I know it matters if you have a state of the
art TI
system on your tank or not, but it probably also matters how well
trained
your guys are. 

------------------------------------------
Thomas R. S. Barclay
Voice: (613) 722-3232 ext 349
e-mail: tomb@bitheads.com

Now, now my good man, this is no time for making enemies.

Voltaire (1694-1778), on his death bed in response to a priest asking
that
he renounce Satan.
------------------------------------------