[DSII] Softskinned vehicles against tank guns?

Noticed something as I was futzing around with some sample scenarios with
unarmoured cargo convoys against attackers. With armour 0 you
are assumed to be "softskinned," that means that hitting with /any/
military grade weapon will get at least a DMG result.

A SLAM/3 fires at the unarmoured "Groundhog" at the head of the convoy
and hits; the Groundhog lucks out and the SLAM draws all 0s. That
/still/ leaves the cargo DMG'd because its armour value is equal to
the sum of valid chits (0).

Just an interesting fact I noticed and wasn't sure anyone'd pointed out.

Something else that somewhat bugs me in DSII is the lack of indirect weapons
fire beyond artillery; light Arty RAM units take up lots of space and, for no
good and apparent reason, aren't available at call. Besides, sometimes they're
just a bit of overkill.

I've been toying with the idea of making missiles indirect-fire
capable as well, taking a page from Renegade Legion. Essentially, it would let
you fire your missiles at any target within range that's
been `painted' by a laser-targeter equipped vehicle or infantry team.
Just to balance things out, all attacks are made as if one range band farther
away to account for the arc necessary. (OK, I admit it, I just missed my
opponants saying, `Oh, look, an infantryman; just ignore him, he's useless,'
and shortly thereafter being obliterated by the flight of missiles that come
up from behind a limb of forest.)

I've also considered letting SLAMs go indirect as well, since they
have the arc of fire already, but that might be /real/ overkill; SLAM
packs are already great bang for the buck.

Thoughts?

Ah, one more thing, since it just occured to me; Firer Systems Out results bug
me; you'd think in the future things would be more modular than that.
Suggested fix: on a FSO result roll a d6. A 6 result means all systems are
out, anything else means only the weapon being fired goes on the fritz,
repaired just like a standard FSO result
would be.  This actually gives you a real /reason/ to have secondary
weapons and not just loading up on multi-barrels (since if one of the
multis goes out, the whole thing dies).

(Pity the poor Infantry Walker pilot with three APSWs who gets an FSO;
do we assume he has backup close-assault weapons beyond the APSWS?  It
seems a safe one, so he could at least enter Close Combat.)

Opinions?

> On Thu, 19 Sep 1996, Alex Williams wrote:

Only if the chits are the same valid color, i.e. if only red chits are valid
(like when firing a laser), then green and yellow 0's have no effect.

> I've been toying with the idea of making missiles indirect-fire

GAH! Why make missiles even MORE deadly?

> I've also considered letting SLAMs go indirect as well, since they

Not really -- SLAMs are hindered by their relatively short range.
In the games I have played, SLAMs haven't had much impact because they get
taken out early by lasers and MDCs when they stray away from their covering
terrain. If they stay in cover, then all you have to do is make sure you don't
get too close. If you need to get to or through
their position, then they get flanked -- either they stay in cover and
try to tough it out, or they go hide somewhere else.

> Ah, one more thing, since it just occured to me; Firer Systems Out

Neat idea, but I kind of like the "everything that can go wrong, will" aspect
of the Firer Systems Down chit.

> Rick Rutherford wrote:

Hmm, good point. If all the damage that gets drawn is of invalid
colours the cargo escapes getting DMG from military-class weaponry
(maybe that should be `vehicle class,' since really only infantry
side-arms are the points in question).

> GAH! Why make missiles even MORE deadly?

Because I'm a cruel and evil person with a missile fetish?:) Maybe we
need a new weapon, a GMS/VL (Very Light) that does only one chit damage?

> Not really -- SLAMs are hindered by their relatively short range.

So, you think that indirect fire capability for SLAMs wouldn't be overkill at
all? One would think they'd like the ability to fire from
cover over intervening terrain with their ranges.  (360o turret-mounted
SLAMs start looking /tres/ brutal right about them.)

> Neat idea, but I kind of like the "everything that can go wrong, will"

Hmmmm... I'll keep that in mind.