G'day guys,
Given the number of "but DS2 don't got that" in the recent threads what extra
weapons (if any) do you think should be added to DS2 if and when it becomes
DS3?
ADS take down artillery LVC (or whatever Oerjan calls it) expand IAVRs to
cover RR capabilities or have a separate weapon system...
Given my knowledge of acronymns I've got to have screwed at least one of the
above up, but hopefully you get the gist;)
If you want to do the same for SG, feel free.
Fire away.... uhhh maybe a poor choice of words;)
> --- Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
- GMS launchers and ammo separate from each other
- GMS rounds capable of firing at aircraft a la LADS,
as adjusted for guidance quality
- ZADS replaced by ZADFC that can be mated to any
full-turret direct fire weapon, with appropriate
ranges and damage for said Direct Fire Weapon.
- Direct fire weapons that fall between APSW and RFAC
1 in size/power (eg .50 cal/12.7, 14.5mm KPV, etc.)
> Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> G'day guys,
How about crew served class 1 support weapons?
Oerjan's fixes to the vehicle capacity system:)
I wrote my own set of 6mm sci-fi rules a long time ago, before I ever
heard of DS2, Iron Cow, or any of the other rule sets available. One of my
thoughts was to give railguns the option of firing directly, as a normal tank
gun, or indirectly. Here's the description from my own dear rule set:
"Rail Guns in Indirect Fire Mode: Because of the sophisticated fire control
systems in use on the Steel Rain© battlefield, Rail Guns have replaced
howitzers as the delivery system for ballistic artillery fire. The Rail Gun is
simply elevated to the appropriate angle and given the appropriate amount of
Âpush by its magnetic coils to put a shell in the appropriate ballistic
arc.
When firing a Rail Gun in the indirect mode, treat the unit as if it were
firing Salvo Rockets, with the following modifications:
· Use the Range and Lethality characteristics of the Rail Gun · A Rail Gun
shell has no burst radius; only a direct hit will have an effect on a target
· Rail Guns have no Smoke or FASCAM capability
All other Artillery conditions apply (such as Blind Fire penalties, Scatter,
FO bonuses, etc.). The benefit is that a single FO Â say, a dismounted
infantry stand  could call down multiple rail guns on enemy units that would
be otherwise out of the line of sight of those units."
The only other weapons systems in my game that I felt were even remotely
creative were these:
"Microwave Projector: A vicious weapon that cooks things from the inside. It
is incredibly heavy because of the generator and capacitors necessary to power
it, and it raises a vehicleÂs Profile considerably because of the large
parabolic dish necessary for adequate projection of the microwaves energy.
However, it is able to sweep across an area and affect multiple units within
that area; up to four units within a 5cm diameter can be hit with one use of
this weapon.
Gel Flamer: A gel flamer is a lightweight weapon that fires streams of gel
capsules over a short distance. When the capsules hit a target, they rupture,
spreading the sticky gel over the surface of the target. The gel bursts into
flame just seconds after exposure to oxygen, and burns with an intense heat.
Because the gel is made using powdered magnesium, water cannot extinguish it.
However, its life cycle is short, and the gel burns out after only a short
period. Furthermore, the gel is smokeless; the only smoke produced is from the
explosion of fuel and munitions in the target vehicle."
My rules are pretty simplistic, I'm afraid; more of Epic 40K than of Dirtside.
Still, maybe the systems above could be adapted to DS2.
> Andreas Udby wrote:
> I wrote my own set of 6mm sci-fi rules a long time ago, before I ever
DS2 artillery already use mass-driver (ie., railgun) howitzers, but they
can't perform as MDCs at will since the calibre is too different - MDCs
fire small-caliber slugs, whereas artillery rounds need to be large to
carry any worthwhile payload.
There are a couple of other practical problems with using MDCs as
indirect-fire weapons:
1) The reason why today's SPGs are taller than today's MBTs is that a gun
fired at high elevation will recoil downwards, and since you usually don't
want the gun breech to slam through the turret floor the SPGs are taller to
provide the necessary recoil space. Railguns have only marginally less
recoil momentum to take care of than propellant-powered guns - no escape
from Mr. Newton, unfortunately - so an MDC capable of indirect fire will
also need to be taller (in DS terms, cause the vehicle to have a larger
Signature unless it spends Stealth on reducing it again) than an MDC which can
only fire directly.
2) A modern APFSDS (aka "long rod") tank projectile fired at the tank's
maximum elevation (depends on the exact tank used, but somewhere in
the10-20 degrees ballpark) will travel an outrageously long distance -
I've seen figures from 70 km to 130 km. In order for an MDC to fire indirectly
at *short* range it either needs to fire its projectiles almost straight up
(which makes the accuracy questionable) or turn the muzzle velocity WAY down
(which reduces its damage potential quite a lot), or both.
> "Microwave Projector: A vicious weapon that cooks things from the
Single-shot (explosively-powered) microwave projectors needn't be larger
than a small bag, but they're not all that difficult to protect yourself
against... particularly not if you're already sitting inside a metal box.
> Gel Flamer:
Sounds mostly like your basic thermobaric projectile. The Russians have used
them for twenty years at least; now the West wants them too.
> The gel bursts into flame just seconds after exposure to oxygen,
Make that "milliseconds or less"
> However, its life cycle is short,
Also measured in milliseconds
> Furthermore, the gel is smokeless;
Doesn't sound all that likely with the composition you describe, but warhead
design isn't my main subject.
Later,
> 1) The reason why today's SPGs are taller than today's MBTs is that a
As an aside I've seen my fair share of guns with divits in the hull floor from
the breech impacts. I wouldn't call it a common occurance but it isn't all
that rare either.
> --- Doug Evans <devans@nebraska.edu> wrote:
> Probably not; I like toying with possibilities.
I dislike making the player just along for the ride and to roll the dice.
Morale is all well and good in ground combat where it can be demonstrated
historically that it had a real effect. I just don't see any modern warships
refusing orders. The commo is too good to play stupid, and everyone on the
ship pretty much doesn't see past their piece of the pie except the senior
officers. The black gang doesn't know where the enemy is or really where the
ship is going, they just know what speed the Captain wants, and they give it
to him, until machinery starts breaking down. Likewise a gun turret crew has
no control over where the ship goes, they just shoot at
the targets--and only a moron would refuse that order
(killing bad guys ALWAYS increases survival rates). And so forth.
> Not really germaine to the discussion.
Yes it is. Remember, your average O3 and higher would rather chop off
sensitive bits of personal anatomy than endanger his promotion chances. Or a
nicer way of saying it would be that most in any navy worthy of the name would
be way to professional to NOT try to close to torpedo range with that
Dreadnought, even in a tin can.
Rules for using towed artillery and turretless tanks (SPA/assault guns)
in
direct fire combat--have seen some house-rules but lets make it
official.
Cant think of anything else at the moment......
Greetings!
I was thinking about adding some auxiliary ships to my NAC fleet, which can
double as Merchant ships for scenarios. In FB1, a typical version is
described, in the Mass 100 range, but also mentioned, smaller-bigger
ones are possible.
UNSC has one, which seems quite big as well, and the KraVak has a smaller
(Mass 40).
The question crossed my mind: Are there different classes of tenders as well?
One which usually serves up to destroyer? And really big one for the
Dreadnaughts and up? Different one for fuel? For ammunition? For food and
other consumables? Or the one basket for all..?
Hospital ships? They were converted/used by surface navys, but would
they be justified in the space..? If you get in an accident up there, not much
chance to survive, yet far from the safety of planetside hospital complexes or
the huge space stations they might boost the morale
Skimming through my FB2 it also seemed a good question: While KraVak and
Phalon (might) have axuliaries as well, what will the SaVasku do..? Rulewise
you can make one with huge biomass minimum weaponry and a dronebay ÃÂ as
long as the other has one as well, it would have no problem. One or two waves
of drones and pods and the ship is gone... At least no
problem with fat. ;-)
Thanks in Advance,
Akos Büky