I've seen two totally wonderful online shipyards for FB (used them both, very
happily). I wondered if someone had done an online DS2 vehicle designer as a
Java applet?
Has anyone thought about the incongruities between SG2 and DS2 and how to
resolve them in terms of the vehicle design rules?
example:
- SG2 rules buy spaces for troops "by the troop" and DS2 does it
"by the element" which leads to a valid SG2 design not being valid under DS2
(IFV that carries a 2 man GMS team and a 4 man rifle team for example in 6 cap
points would require
8 cap points in DS2 - due to the fact all elements are
considered to take 4 pts).
- I believe there are different size class limitations on some
of the weapon systems IIRC
- SG2 I think limits you to max wpn class = class of vehicle and
I don't think DS2 does
Now, I could have misremembered some of these (I need to scan both books to
come up with a list of incongruities) but I'd like to see a designer software
engine that addresses these and produces designs that function well in both
systems.
Correct. DS2 uses 4 capacity points per Infantry element (8 per Power Armor
element).
An element is described as 2-5 men and their equipment. SG2 uses 1 point
per figure (2 for Power Armor). This amounts to about the same if you use 4
man squads in SG2. But, as you say, a legal SG vehicle can be illegal in DS2.
My resolution is that a squad of less than 2 elements falls below the
granularity of DS2. Thus, the vehicle with seating for 6 would convert to DS2
as having a capacity for 1 infantry element (both teams would combine to get a
DS2 element). Example 2 on SG p.32 would be illegal in DS2. In DS2 terms it
would hold 1 element of infantry, but could not hold Power Armor.
I believe you are incorrect on the weapons size fit for SG2. SG p.32, example
1 deals with a size 4 weapon being placed in a size 3 vehicle. DS2, does
suggest a limit of 1 class size larger than the vehicle size.
-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net The Full Thrust Ship Registry:
http://www.ftsr.org
FTSR - Armor Division
http://www.ftsr.org/ds2/
FTSR - Infantry Division
http://www.ftsr.org/sg2/
-----
> -----Original Message-----
> "Barclay, Tom" wrote:
http://www.cs.utk.edu/~cowell/min/ds2/gen.html
Not a Java applet, but an on-line form generation tool that generates an
HTML table for DS2. There may be a Java applet out there for DS2 vehicles.
Hi,
> I've seen two totally wonderful online shipyards for FB (used them
I have started one, but I really need to get more organised before I have a
realistic chance of finishing it...
> Has anyone thought about the incongruities between SG2 and DS2 and how
This is true, however, I have always thought that it made little sense to have
troop space in 4 capacity point increments. Real vehicles simply never behave
this way. So I use the SG2 precedent of
1 cap/1 infantry
2 cap/1 PA trooper
I would be suprised if most people didn't use this house rule if they have
both SG2 and DS2. My program will allow you to use a flexible set of rules.
> Tom
TTFN,
> Tony Christney wrote:
> This is true, however, I have always thought that it made little sense
So the specialist equipment in the 2-man elements - SAWs, LADs, GMSs
etc - doesn't take up any space at all inside the vehicle? Doesn't
sound particularly real either, I'm afraid.
Regards,
Oerjan:
Well, I guess that I am also implicitly assuming that all of the special
weapon ammo is distributed throughout the vehicle, troops, etc. Sure, it takes
up extra space but the extra amount, once spread between the troops in a
squad, is insignificant. Remember, specialist elements don't carry rifles and
their squad mates will usually be more than happy to carry a little extra
weight in exchange for the added firepower.
IIRC, you don't have to use extra capacity for specialist elements in SG2, so
why would you in DS2? My personal preference would be to have the same vehicle
with the same troop distribution in both games. I just don't see either game
as being fine grained enough to make a difference. YMMV.
Tony.
> Tony Christney wrote:
> Tony Christney wrote:
> Oerjan:
No, it's not. Believe me - I build such special weapon ammo for a
living, and keeping the size of the handling package/launch tube down
to something which actually fits in an IFV together with an infantry squad is
often a serious problem. I can't vouch for artillery spotting
equipment since we don't build it in-house, but there's a very good
reason why 2-man LAD (hand-held SAMs) and GMS infantry elements should
take up *at least* as much space as a 4-man rifle team.
To take a modern example:
The M2A2 Bradley IFV carries 6 or 8 (can't remember which at the moment)
grunts and 5 TOW missiles, in addition to its crew.
The M2A3 Bradley CFV carries 2 grunts and 12 missiles in the same space where
the M2A2 carried the full squad and 5 missiles.
IOW, 7 extra missile *reloads* - GMS/Hs, but without the launcher -
takes up about as much internal space as 4 or 6 men.
Light ATGMs (GMS/L in DS2 terms) are somewhat smaller and lighter than
heavy ones, certainly, but the difference in volume for the launch
tube/handling package (which is what's important for logistics) is
surprisingly small. Future developments will probably reduce the missile
sizes, but even if the volume goes down by 50% (which means
that the missile may be at most 25-35% the volume of today's missiles)
the specialist ammo *still* takes up as much space as two men.
> Remember, specialist elements don't carry rifles and their squad
It's a nice thought, but I'm afraid you need to rethink it. A rifle -
particularly a bullpup - is simply nowhere near the size of an ATGM or
SAM, even if you include a few hundred extra rifle rounds.
Sure, the riflemen in the rifle element can carry the extra missile reloads
once they're *outside* their vehicle; the problem is to fit both men and
missiles *inside* it. And to do so in a fashion which
allows the men to dismount fast - with *all* of the specialist
equipment; something which would be quite impossible if you "distribute the
ammo throughout the vehicle".
> IIRC, you don't have to use extra capacity for specialist elements
You're the one who invoked "realism" in your previous post. In this particular
respect DS2 is a couple hundred percent more realistic than SG2, so why do you
use the SG2 mechanic?
Regards,