Afternoon (or evening, or morning, or whatever time it is in your neck of the
woods),
Have a DSII question for you that I'm sure someone somewhere in some distant
past, place, dimension knows ('cause I can't find an answer in the rulesbook).
Can a tank (element, whatnot) fire a GMS in addition to it's main weapon in a
given turn? And if not, what's the point of mounting
GMS' on tanks with weapons that out-range the GMS'? (and hit better,
etc).
For example, say I have a tank design with an HKP/4, Enhanced
FireCon, and a GMS/L enhanced. Range of the GMS/L is 36". Medium
range of the HKP/4 is 36". Both have the same to hit chance (D8).
Both draw the same damage chits (red/yellow). However, the GMS/L
can be spoofed, intercepted, knocked down, etc, whereas the HKP/4
does not suffer these problems. AND the HKP/4 draws 4 chits, whereas
the GMS/L draws 3. What's the point of carrying a GMS/*, then? Is
there some hidden thing I'm missing about GMS systems? (the answer
is "yes, obviously" to those who know ;-)
> --- Indy <kochte@stsci.edu> wrote:
> Can a tank (element, whatnot) fire a GMS in addition
Nope.
And if not, what's the point
> of mounting
Brain fart on the part of the designer.
> GMS/*, then? Is
The only reason I can find for mounting the GMS is to
put serious anti-armor firepower on small vehicles.
> Indy wrote:
The to-hit vs a direct fire weapon will be the target signature die
and the cover die.
The to-hit vs a GMS will be the ECM die and the PDS die.
It depends on the target which weapon would be the one of choice.
A GMS/L on a main battle tank seems like a pretty dumb idea though,
unless you're designing a low-tech scenario.
> Jon Davis wrote:
Mmmm, good points. Thanks.
> It depends on the target which weapon would be the one of choice.
Lack of capacity points to install the GMS/H?
> At 02:31 10/03/02 -0800, John wrote:
> --- Indy <kochte@stsci.edu> wrote:
WE have a house rule allowing vehicles mounting multiple GMS to be allowed to
engage multiple targets, so it follows that if you and your opponent allow it
then your tank can if it wants shoot that GMS as well.
Cheers
> --- Derek Fulton <derekfulton@bigpond.com> wrote:
> WE have a house rule allowing vehicles mounting
Indeed--house rules can affect the relative value of
various systems greatly. Of course, I'd want to start adding to the cost of
GMSs if you make them more capable. OO can do the analysis, but if you take my
'standard' tank destroyer designs (size 2, 2xGMS/H)
and allow them to engage 2 targets each, it seems to me that you make them
almost twice as effective, even if a bit more than half of all GMSs miss
(which typically happens on my tabletop because everyone buys
ECM and PDS because I'm known to be GMS-happy)
> At 06:55 PM 3/10/02 -0500, Indy wrote:
Goodness knows I haven't played that much DSII, but can't GMS systems fire
indirect if another unit performs a spotting action, to act as an observer?
Seems like that would be a good reason to use 'em, though the
question of why have both on the same vechile does, to a large extent, still
remain.
> At 06:26 10/03/02 -0800, John wrote:
There is some truth in this, but given we have not seen it radically break our
games its a HOUSE RULE that we've found useful and are happy to play
:)
Cheers
> At 09:38 10/03/02 -0500, Aaron wrote:
> Goodness knows I haven't played that much DSII, but can't GMS systems
Have a look here, a nice page with some good ideas.
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/1966/ds2300.htm
Cheers
> Indy wrote:
> Can a tank (element, whatnot) fire a GMS in addition to it's main
Not under the published rules, no.
> And if not, what's the point of mounting GMS' on tanks with weapons
Size/1, Armour/0, CFE power, HMW mobility, 1xGMS/H. When in a Hull Down
position this vehicle defends against your long-range gunfire with a D12
signature die and a D10 secondary die. In the same situation, the only defence
it has against your GMS is a D4 ECM die. Which of your GMS and your gun is
more likely to hit it?
Yes, enough artillery will take of that jeep too... if you manage the Request
for Artillery roll, have a battery available, and has enough
ammo :-/
> John Atkinson wrote:
> Of course, I'd want to start adding to the cost of GMSs if you make
One very nasty thing to do to GMSs is to force them to keep track of their
ammo supply. Yes, that adds book-keeping - but it also means that while
having a dozen GMS launchers on a single vehicle could allow you to fire
them all in a single turn, you most likely won't be able to carry any reloads
in the same single vehicle <g>
> OO can do the analysis, but if you take my 'standard' tank destroyer
Twice the number of shots but no other changes => vehicle is SQRT(2) = 1.4x as
effective.
Later,
GMS are good vs small and heavily stealthed vehicles (especially ones in
some cover). They also pack a good wallop for thier size/capacity and
get "full turret" capibility for free.
And, no, under the standard rules, you cannot fire both the gun and missile.
-Bri
[quoted original message omitted]