Re: [GZG] a peek from FT3 on fighters/ordnance (was: Re: FT:XD changes, part 1)
From: John Lerchey <lerchey@g...>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 15:50:12 -0400
Subject: Re: [GZG] a peek from FT3 on fighters/ordnance (was: Re: FT:XD changes, part 1)
This is why I stated a preference for the ADFC to be an ADFC, doubling
the range of PDS.
In the proposed version of the rules, the ADS (formerly ADFC) is a
double range PDS.
So if you have a ship with 4 PDS and 1 ADS, you can fire a total of 3
dice at 6.1-12mu and 15 dice at 0-6mu at small targets.
If the ADFC were an Fire Control for the PDS, you would be able to
fire 12 dice (from the PDS) out to 12 mu at small targets, unless the
ADFC were disabled, in which case you would fire your 12 dice out to
6mu (PDS no longer enhanced by ADFC).
Not arguing with Indy any more about it, 'cause they've shot me down
on this about a billion times but that's how I would do it. ;)
The CIDS only effects ordnance/fighters attacking the current ship,
but gives you a "kill number" die roll against each incoming attacker.
So a CIDS-2 equipped ship being attacked by 12 missiles would roll 12
dice, scoring hits against the missiles on any rolls of 1 or 2.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Eric Foley <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Wait, so what exactly is the effect of the ADS? It extends the range
> like an ADFC to 12 MU, or it's just a single but longer ranged PDS
> no effect on any other defensive systems?
> So a DDE would use CIDS mainly to keep themselves from getting
> assuming that it can't be used in an area defense role regardless,
Gzg-l mailing list