Prev: Re: [GZG] Subject: Re: What are the pitfalls of standardised forces? Next: Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS

Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS

From: "Tom B" <kaladorn@g...>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:23:04 -0400
Subject: Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lI'm
not sure if the (Bison or Coyote/LAV) is designed to lose wheels more or
less easily. I do know that after a roadside bomb, they are disabled a
lot
of the time. And you can say they're mobile enough to leave the scene,
but
that tends to prove not true judging by the number of flipovers (onto
the
top) or tipovers (onto the side) I've seen in the news. Also, there tend
to
be two-phase bombings and consequently that suggests they were not able
to
drive away.

So, the questions are:
1a) How do you make a fair attack role in DS/SG with an IED that is
command
detonated?
1b) Alternately, sensor detonated?
2) How would this translate into SG2s major/minor impact? Or would it?
3) When such an attack hits and it is a buried mine underneath, what
should
be the odds of suspension damage on a non-penetrating hit?
4) Should M-kill chances vary with suspension type (more wheels, less
chance
to hit, tracks harder to hit, etc)?

I'm looking for some fair ways to represent these aspects in game.

-- 
"Now, I go to spread happiness to the rest of the station. It is a
terrible
responsibility but I have learned to live with it."
Londo, A Voice in the Wilderness, Part I

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like
administering medicine to the dead." -- Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine


Prev: Re: [GZG] Subject: Re: What are the pitfalls of standardised forces? Next: Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS