Prev: Re: [GZG] GW and Re: Artillery considerations (was: Re: Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi!) Next: Re: [GZG] Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi!

Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations

From: "Andreas Udby" <andreas.udby@g...>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 20:24:04 -0400
Subject: Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOne
concept on future artillery:  autoloading direct fire tank guns (maybe
railguns or MDCs) that are mounted to the side or rear of a turret,
where
they can elevate to emulate artillery pieces without the hull
interfering.
This would let the main gun operate much like artillery.  The onboard
computer directs the autoloader to load the gun tube with the
appropriate
ordnance for the fire mission:	fin-guided sabot rounds for direct fire,
or
HEDP rounds for indirect fire (or perhaps the sabot rounds could also be
fired in indirect mode and guided into the top decks of armored targets,
functioning much like JDAM ordnance).  Conversion from one fire mode to
the
other takes mere seconds, and the fire-control systems are made to
compute
effective firing solutions for either mode without need for
recalibration.

Yes, someday I will patent this idea and then cackle evilly as I survey
the
plebians from atop my mountain fortress -- a mountain made entirely of
money!	Someday.  (Sigh)

The in-game aspects of this would allow a tank to transition between
fire
modes using half its action points, or whatever action system the game
uses.  The indirect fire mode would be less powerful than that of
thoroughbred artillery pieces, but the advantage to the player would be
the
versatility of the tank.

Mountain of money... (sigh)


Prev: Re: [GZG] GW and Re: Artillery considerations (was: Re: Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi!) Next: Re: [GZG] Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi!