Re: [DS] Some questions from this weekend

--- Thomas Barclay <kaladorn@magma.ca> wrote:

> On the other side, we had 6 MDC armed fast 
> GEV grav tanks, 6 DFFG armed fast GEV tanks, 
> 12 fast GEV APCs, 8 hi-mob wheeled APCs, 4 hi-
> mob wheeled HKP armed TDs, and 20 infantry 
> stands. 2 3-gun batteries of heavy artillery with 
> 4 shots each any type (MRLS). They also had 6 
> hover jeeps with recce/spotters. 

Am I the only one that really dislikes mixed-mobility
forces?
 
> 1) Does the game permit you to call artillery by 
> grid reference (ie no spotter, pre-registered 
> fire points). If so, when? If we assume that 

No.

> everything on the battlefield is known because 
> of drones, sensors, sat recon, etc., then one 
> should be able to drop shots on top of the 
> enemy anytime without spotters. If we assume 
> this is not the case, do spotters then have to 
> make some sort of sighting rolls to see the 
> enemy? 

No.
 
> 2) Artillery comes down mightily fast. If I have 
> three or four attack waves driving forward with 
> a 1" separation (100m) and the enemy drops a 
> salvo in open-sheaf upon me, i'm only going to 
> be able to move at maximum one of these 
> units, even though ostensibly the entire wave is 
> moving concurrently. Hitting moving targets 
> thus seems awfully simple. We thought this was 
> a bit much. Is that just me or has anyone else 

Nope.  Your fool commander should not have CRS so
badly that he bunched up like that.  

 
> sense. Plus, there seems to be no quality roll or 
> anything to determine if the artillery is on target 
> and effectual. It just seems to arrive. Or did I 
> miss something?

Nope.  Artillery comes where you tell it to come. 
With modern ballistic science, artillery, even
unguided comes down where the FDC tells it to 99%+ of
the time.  FDC is an AI nowdays.  What's left is the
primary cause of artillery not hitting the target in
any era:  Spotter Error.  However, with GPS in every
helmet and laser rangefinders on every rifle, then
that is reduced.  There's still a chance of error, but
not a significant one given the ground scale and the
fact that the artillery shells are all carrier rounds
with lots of little submunitions saturating the impact
area.
 
> 3) Can vehicles alone close assault infantry? If 
> not, why not? 

I'm inclined to say NO, because it's called Infantry
Close Assault.	But it doesn't say so.
 
> 4) Can infantry close assault vehicles with no 
> supporting infantry? 

All it says is that the target must be one enemy unit
holding a single position or location.

My question would be WHY?  There's no benefit that
shooting at them with IAVRs wouldn't bring.
 
> 5) I have my tank in the edge of an urban area, 
> ostensibly using buildings for cover. Is this 
> considered "soft cover"? if so, why? If not, what 
> is it considered? 

For what purposes?  For direct fire from heavy
weapons?  Yes.

John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes