Re: [DS, maybee SG] Odd questions

On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 07:48:46 -0400 "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
<Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil> writes:
>Answers:
>1) Only on an early attempt at an Ogre cross-over. I guess I always 
>assumed
>that it was illegal (but I could be wrong).

I can't find it explicitly but I assume it was just another 'nobody in
their right mind would do that' thing...

Since I'm not, in my right mind that is, I want to figure out what to do
if i choose to let my "traditional enemy" to the NPC (missile Happy
types) mount multiple PDS's for sa scenario.

I am going to assume, for simplicity sake, that this is done to a MICV. 
The Foes would be RRR (Uses HKP and Reactive armor) NEA (Uses MDC).  For
simplicity sake, let us posit an infantry heavy counter attack on a
position taken 24 hours ago.  The attackers will be NEA with a couple
platoons of a new MICV (Size 4: FT x 2, PDS/Enh x 2, and a turret MDC/2
-
down from an 'standard' Heavy MICV with FT x 2, MDC/3, and only one
PDS.)

The previously pushed out NEA defenders reported that the force moved
into the position was supported by a platoon of 4 Condor AT (Size 5, 5 x
GMS/H, FT x 1-	one of them most likely a GMS/L team - one cap point
unused) and a company of 4 Eagle AT (Size 4. 4 x GMS/H, Ft x 1 (as
above), with the majority of the surviving attackers being Red Brocket
MICV (Size 3, FT x 2, Turreted HEL/1 and GMS/H) and very few (can we say
ouch!) Fox AFV (Size 2, GMS/H and DFFG/2 turret.)  None of the larger
Copperhead Assault Tanks (Size 4, FT x 2, GMS/H x 3) are believed to
have
survived the attack (but some of those FT's might have.)

Should I have the double PDS's :

1) Roll two dice (seems dicey, [pardon the pun] and maybe over
effective)
2) Bump the PDS die up one type
3) allow a re-roll if the GMS penetrated the first PDS and ECM...

>2) No. Since they are different systems, You could not fire them as a
>twin-mount. There seems very little reason to do mount both. If you 
>could
>fire the Light, you could fire the Heavy, so why use the lighter 
>missile?
>

No, they are both the same system, just as a MDC/1 and a MDC/5 are the
same system.  This differs from my other 'off the wall' idea of mixed
design weapons in a turret.  A little bit.  And Jon allowed that a house
rule that a HEL/1 and a DFFG/5 in the same turret could be fired at the
same target was not entirely crazy. <grin>

Why would you do this?	Well, let's give you an example:

The difference between the standard smaller NPC recon vehicles -
Chipmunk
and the Squirrel -   are in the 'self-defense' weapons (well, that's the
doctrine, shoot only if you are spotted... then run like crazy!)  

I give double points to the opponent who knocks out NPC Recon vehicles;
that's so the NPC player treats them with the respect and care they
deserve.  So they should be hidden in terrain alloqing them freedom to
act as F.O.'s without getting in fire fights.  Esoecially since more
then
one or two to a task force is highly unusual (the latter in defense
almost always/only.)

Chipmunk:
Size 2 - GMS/L, FT x 1 (F.O.), and a PDS/Sup.

Squirrel:
Size 2 - GMS/H, FT x 1 (F.O.) and a PDS/Bas

Say one of the constituent tribes/nations of the NPC decides in a Recon
with a little more firepower and less defense is 'better' against their
RRR neighbors (who needs PDS's for HKP armed foes?) so they come up
with:

Gopher:
Size 2 - GMS/H, GMS/L, and FT x 1 (F.O.)

The GMS/H is used for ranges from 36.1 to 48 inches but up close they
volley fire both GMS's (same type of system - as listed on pages 8 & 9
as
RFAC, HVC, HKP, MDC, HEL, DFFG, GMS, and SLAM.)   The /L and /H are
**size** delimiters, not system differences any more then MDC/5 is a
different kind of system from a MDC/4 or /3, /2, /1.

Voila', a vehicle mounting two sizes of the same weapon.  And with a
design 'history' to the choice.

Ever wonder from what twisted recess of my mind come these ideas?

Bur so far, I  have not fielded any of these designs in a game to check
play balance.

And won't until after the November con locally (There I will be trying
to
recruit interest so will use 'normal' vehicle designs.	Of course,
that's
'normal' in my mind and campaign history.)

Gracias,
Glenn/Triphibious@juno.com
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
Historical - Warbeads@juno.com
Fantasy and 6mm - dwarf_warrior@juno.com

>-----
>Brian Bell
>-----
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Glenn M Wilson [mailto:triphibious@juno.com]
>Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2001 07:08
>To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
>Subject: [DS, maybee SG] Odd questions
>
>
>1) Anybody ever use multiple PDS's to defend AFV?
>
>2) Anyone ever put GMS/H and GMS/L on the same AFV?
>
>Yes I am playing with designs for the NPC (missile happy!) and their
>traditional foes...
>
>Gracias,
>Glenn/Triphibious@juno.com
>This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
>Historical - Warbeads@juno.com
>Fantasy and 6mm - dwarf_warrior@juno.com
>
>________________________________________________________________
>GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
>Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
>Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

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