Re: SG2: Vehicles with turreted infantry weapons

On Mon, 16 Apr 2001 22:13:22 +0200 "Oerjan Ohlson"
<oerjan.ohlson@telia.com> writes:
<snip>
>>But those in DS2 are not turreted as his example was referring to but
>per
>>page 11 of DS2 - "This is assumed to be a Machinegun...on an external
>>remote mounting."  I assume this is different from being a main or
>>secondary system in a 'proper' turret.
>
>That same "external remote mounting" reference you quote explicitly
>says that the weapon is capable of all-arc fire.
>
>The capacity requirements table on p.16 specifies that all additional
>APSW cost 1 capacity point each - they don't seem to be included in 
>the
>"All direct fire weapons" category, since they have their own line in
>that table.
>
>So, as I understand the rules each extra all-arc APSW beyond the first
>one costs 1 capacity point, not 3. But if you absolutely *want* to 
>make
>the APSWs three times as big as you have to, don't let me stop you ;-)
>

Not thjat I want to but the referance was, was it not, to a weapon in a
turret - like a co-ax MG in today's turrets.  Yes, three or even two
seems a bit steep but if it is in a turret as a primary or secondary
system, as I read the rules (and it's just IMO and somewhat
over-weighted
also IMO) it's a 3 cap primary or a 2 cap secondary if it's in a main
turret as opposed to a pintle or remote mini-turret (lik the commander's
weapon in either an early M60 or possibly the Sheridan) mount.	I like
your read better.

>>>>House rules (If I ran that arrangement) would be to allow the GL to
>>>>have AT type ammo that acted as a HVC (range as class-3, since 
>there
>>>>is nothing smaller for HVC's
>>>
>>>"HVC less than class/3" = "small-caliber shell-firing cannon" = RFAC
>>
>>Actually RFAC and HVC seem similar but I don't see the DS2 'logic'
>>equating them exactly...
>
>They have virtually identical PSB descriptions ("conventional" except
>for the use of more efficient propellants), and completely identical
>chit validities. Sounds like a pretty strong case for equating them,
>no?
>

Then why not call them HVC1 through HVC-5?  But yes, the explanation
does
break down (or RFAC-3 is really KEC-3...) in that way.

>The main differences are the size classes available (no overlap 
>between
>the two types) and that RFACs are supposed to be mostly shell-firing
>while the HVCs mostly fire APFSDS (though the HVCs are able to fire
>shell as well, since they have a reasonable anti-infantry
>capability)... that's an even better reason for calling a light 
>grenade
>launcher "RFAC", since grenades are shells and APFSDS aren't :-)
>

I can accept that.  But the rules specifically call the GL's APSW.

>>But while that is superficially true,  I was thinking that a 40mm GL
>>(his LAV example) was not exactly a RFAC but an APSW.
>
>A 40mm GL is a small, fairly short-ranged rapid-fire shell-firing
>weapon with decent effect against infantry but poor effect against all
>but the lightest armour.
>
>According to the DSII weapon description an RFAC is a small, fairly
>short-randed rapid-fire shell-firing weapon. The rules gives it a
>reasonable effect against infantry (though *all* DSII weapons are IMO
>too weak against infantry) but poor against all but the lightest 
>armour
>- particularly the RFAC/1.
>

Well, i expect you can only do so much with 20mm!

>The DSII weapon description claims that RFAC/2s correspond "very
>roughly" to today's 30-40mm cannon. However, since a GL is both 
>smaller
>and shorter-ranged than a 30-40mm cannon (shorter barrel gives lower
>muzzle velocity gives lower recoil, which gives a light weapon) and
>effectively unable to use high-velocity AP rounds so they have to use
>HEAT or equivalent instead (which together with the small caliber 
>gives
>a rather unimpressive armour penetration), I'd call the GL an RFAC/1
>instead of RFAC/2.
>

I could play under those rules.

>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
>

Gracias,
Glenn/Triphibious
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit: