RE: DS2: Design questions of my own.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[mailto:owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU]On Behalf Of John Atkinson
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 4:00 PM
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: DS2: Design questions of my own.

--- Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> Boeing of Cascadia BT-14X
>> Class 5 Fast Tracked, FGP
>
>In my experience, Class 5 vehicles are rarely
>cost-effective (I KNOW I'm going to get lit up on that
>with a 10 page statistical analysis on this subject).

Actually, I'll give you that. When we run games the 5's die right along
with
the 3's. The only caveat that I would throw in there is - given the
funding
non-issues with Cascadia - I would run a point (probably 2) of Stealth.
Here
the stats would start to shift: class 5 armor, with only a class 3
chance of
getting hit.

You have the missile threat covered with the ECM and PDS, so if you make
the
armor ablative than you mitigate HEL threats as well, maximizing the
armor's
efficiency (fitting nicely with the survival aspect of the Cascadia
doctrine).

Caterpillar Defense Products T-22D
Class 5 Fast Tracked, FGP
Armor 5 (ablative)
Stealth 2
Superior ECM & FireCon
MDC 5
SPDS
APFC
Co-ax RFAC 2 (For anti-personnel use, having to do with house rules)
back-up systems

Should run you over 600 points each by the DSII design rules.

>> Kenworth KTX
>> Class 6 FT, HMT
>
>Oh, wow.  Class 6 doesn't increase firepower.
>Protection is minimal increase.  The problem is that
>given the lethality of DSII weapons, class 6 armor can
>be penetrated by an HKP/3 far too often to be worth
>the cost.

Agreed. Class 6 would be large for the sake of being large, and not for
any
significant operation advantage.

>John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/