There seems to be lots of interest!
GEVs
I do not know the GEV weapons restrictions in SG can anybody explain them?
I think that double movement 30" disrupts the feel of the game. In DS when a
unit moves and you decide to interrupt and activate a platoon to fire upon it,
when that is resolved the moving unit is free to do whatever it
pleases. With 30" of movement it is conceivable that you could run past 5
unactivated units and only take fire from 1. An easy way to limit this is to
not allow 30" of movement, more complex methods may be desirable. I would not
allow GEVs the ability to perform popups as someone suggested.
The difference between a GEV and VTOL is that a GEV lacks the power to lift
itself without the benefit of the skirt.
Limiting GEVs mounting recoilsome weapons to size class might make me happy. I
haven't seen any GEVs larger than size 3 in our games so I don't feel that
GEVs are completely overshadowing tracked MBTs. GEVs that plant and fire
really cause me grief on this position, I think that if they plant and fire
they should be able to carry larger weapons but should they be able to carry a
weapon comparable to a tracked MBT? I would like to see plant and fire GEVs
restricted in mobility.
Should there be a GEV armour limit? If they are small then no, armour 3 is not
too much for any vehicle (it's probably some plastic anyway). Maybe
armour 4+ should be reserved for tracked MBTs?
Thoughts?
21st Century Hussars
-Max weapon class for recoilers equal to vehicle size class, must plant
to fire.
-Max weapon class for recoilers equal to vehicle size class less 1, may
fire on the run.
-Non recoilers, vehicle size class plus 1, go nuts!
-APSWs and RFACs are considered to have negligible recoil for vehicle
purposes.
-Max armour class for fast GEVs 3, slow GEVs 4? completely arbitrary.
-Planting costs x" movement where x is to be determined by the studio
audience.
Murray Baines (250)356-9668
> You wrote:
> I think that double movement 30" disrupts the feel of the game. In DS
Huh? Who says you can only activate for opportunity fire once an activation.
If necessary, I'll activate my entire command to blow away a platoon.
Hi all,
There is one very important military use for GEVs that no one
has brought up - coastal landings. After watching "Saving Private
Ryan" I think that everyone would agree that some GEV tanks would be very
useful during such incredibly costly landings.
IIRC, the Soviets made a very large GEV landing craft. Not particularly well
armed, but at least it gets you through the intertidal zone...
> At 05:56 PM 9/3/98 -0500, you wrote:
I recall thinking it poorly armed compared to naval vessels of comparable
size. Compared to an MBT, OTOH, it is an enourmous monster!
Another place where GEVs would be much more effective than tracked vehicles is
geology like the Canadian shield, where the vast number of lakes would severly
restrict the mobility of tracked vehicles. Also, the notorious muddy fields of
the Low countries of Europe.
Tony spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> Hi all,
OTOH, if you count one or more RFAC/2s, GMS/L or H, and AGLs as
poorly armed..... I'd hate to see a well armed GEV. The Russian one is a big
monster and reasonably well equipped (just like its us counterpart). Twilight
2000 had nice colour plates and descriptions for these beasties.
Tom.
/************************************************
In a message dated 9/3/1998 8:16:44 PM Central Daylight Time,
> Thomas.Barclay@sofkin.ca writes:
<<
OTOH, if you count one or more RFAC/2s, GMS/L or H, and AGLs as
poorly armed..... I'd hate to see a well armed GEV. The Russian one is a big
monster and reasonably well equipped (just like its us counterpart). Twilight
2000 had nice colour plates and descriptions for these beasties.
Tom. >> The TW 2000 Soviet hovercraft (at least the ones in the Soviet Vehicle
Handbook) were purely fictional vehicles, albeit good looking ones. Their
biggest failing is lack of armor which, combined with thousands of gallons of
aviation fuel, makes them less than ideal for opposed amphibious landings.
Of real Russian craft, Murena-class comes closest to being a
"hovertank". It is not a troop carrier but a fire support craft armed with a
30mm Gatling, 122 mm rocket launchers and 30mm automatic grenade launchers.
They could easily
accomodate ATGMs if needed. Their displacement is around 40-50 tons.