DS2: IAVR and GMS/P

I thought I saw someone say (a day or so back) that the GMS/P wasn't (in
their version) given anti-infantry capability because the IAVR had none.
Is this true? In SG2, the IAVR can really up the punch of an infantry squad
(and a number of vietnam movies have made this point...). I'd
argue GMS/P is basically an IAVR with guidance attached.

Just a thought.

Hi Tom,

Jon T would have to clarify the reasoning behind the DS implementation of
IAVRs but I gather that since DS is essentially an Armour game that infantry
will ALWAYS save their IAVRs for the enemy A vehicles coz they KNOW that
there's a swag of them out there! Same would apply to GMS/Ps I
suppose.......

Owen G

> -----Original Message-----

I recall objecting to giving GMS/P's any anti-infantry capability in
DSII. While Owen gives a very good reason, I must confess that this reason
didn't cross my mind, though it should have. Let me reiterate my reasons:

A) Regular rifle elements already have IAVR's, which do have some
anti-infantry capability, yet they are not given a separate damage
capacity vs. infantry. My assumption was that this is because their
capability, like that of the SAW, is already factored into the rifle element.
(or, if we follow Mr.Glover's excellent reasoning, they're not SUPPOSED to be
wasted
on infantry with so many vehicles around).  That means that a GMS/P
equipped rifle element would ALSO factor THEM into it's basic damage
capability,
since the GMS' are distributed NOT to improve their Anti-infantry
capability, rather to give them a little extra range anti-tank punch.

Furthermore, and more importantly,

B) GMS/P's are NOT just "IAVR's with a guidance package added".  They
have
greater range as well.  So a GMS/P's round uses up more space on
propellant and guidance technology than a deadfired IAVR. I they are both
relatively
the same size, this means the GMS/P's warhead is decidedly smaller than
the IAVR's. Therefore, in order to have relatively the same ability to damage
an armored vehicle, the GMS/P's warhead has to be designed specifically
for
anti-armor use, while an IAVR can employ a design which, while primarily

useful against armor, does have greater anti-infantry capability than a
GMS/P's warhead.

Brian Bilderback

> From: "Glover, Owen" <oglover@museum.vic.gov.au>