Having played Dirtside for the first time for real, we managed to finish the
game still a bit confused over a couple of the rules.
Damage effects: What happens to a vehicle which is damaged twice? Is it
destroyed, or do subsequent damage results have no effect?
Mobility hits: Can these be repaired in the same way as a systems failure?
Vehicle repair: Does an attempt to repair a systems failure count as an
action, or do you get a 'free' roll at the start of each activation (i.e., can
you fire in the same turn that your systems were fixed)?
Close assault: Can a vehicle initiate a close assault in an urban area? If so,
do they have to make reaction tests like infantry does? The rules about close
assault always seem to specify vehicles supporting infantry, rather than
vehicles by themselves, though it also doesn't say that they can't.
Any clarifications greatly appreciated!
> At 5:10 PM +0100 10/24/05, Samuel Penn wrote:
I've always assumed it was a null value.
> Mobility hits: Can these be repaired in the same way as a systems
Yep. Helps to have an ARV nearby to increase the speed of the recovery.
> Vehicle repair: Does an attempt to repair a systems failure count
Nope, it's that element's combat action. The other three elements (or
what ever you have in a troop/platoon) in that platoon can do other
things. Each gets 1 combat action, fire, call artillery, etc.
> Close assault: Can a vehicle initiate a close assault in an urban
I believe that vehicles make a reaction test as well. I seem to recall a
different entry for them on the reaction test chart.
> The rules about close assault always seem to specify vehicles
Vehicles can be close assaulted as well.
> From: ~ On Behalf Of Samuel Penn
> Damage effects: What happens to a vehicle which is damaged
My group have always counted damage to a damaged vehicle as a KO regardless of
whether the chits arrived in the same or a subsequent draw, but the rules
don't state what should happen.
> Mobility hits: Can these be repaired in the same way as a
No. Pg 30 col 1 makes explicit reference to repairing Systems Down, but
describes Immobilisation in terms that make it pretty clear the vehicle is
stationary for the remainder of the battle. Likewise, the Repairing rule (pg
32 col 2) and the Backup Systems (pg 45 col 2) refer solely to repairing
Systems Down results.
In previous discussions on the list, real-world types have
stated that unless things are pretty lethal outside most crews will bail out.
> Vehicle repair: Does an attempt to repair a systems failure
We've always done repairs as a separate roll at the beginning of the turn
(which is simpler, but not what the rules say). Again, it isn't clear if a
repair counts as the unit's action or not.
> Close assault: Can a vehicle initiate a close assault in an
In theory, there's no reason why they shouldn't close-assualt.
Yes, confidence tests are essential. However, the rules downgrade vehicle
weaponry considerably. If you have them, don't forget your APFC blasts which
should count before enemy infantry get to your tanks.
In practice, even vehicles with APFC tend to die in a barrage
of IAVRs if they get anywhere near a built-up area held by
infantry.
> On Monday 24 October 2005 17:19, Ryan Gill wrote:
That's what we assumed in the game, and seems to be what the rules mean,
however I'm leaning more towards it being counted as a kill.
> >Mobility hits: Can these be repaired in the same way as a systems
Looks like we have dissension in the ranks, since CS Renegade claims
otherwise...
> >Vehicle repair: Does an attempt to repair a systems failure count
Each
> gets 1 combat action, fire, call artillery, etc.
We played otherwise (used to FT I guess), though it makes sense that the crew
need to take time out to repair it. We did end up with a tank driving around
with the rest of the unit, waiting for its systems to come online again.
> >Close assault: Can a vehicle initiate a close assault in an urban
Can't see an entry for them, unless you mean on p22. The reaction tests on p23
split vehicles and infantry for all the tests except for close assault, where
it just lumps them together as 'units'. This does seem to suggest both are
treated the same.
> >The rules about close assault always seem to specify vehicles
Thanks.
> On Monday 24 October 2005 21:00, CS Renegade wrote:
Depends on the number of infantry - vehicles with several APSW
were pretty effective in the game we played.
I've found the house rule that a vehicle can mount a number of APSW sized
weapons up to its size class (separately to main guns, but still using
capacity) works well and doesn't affect their combat capability extensively.
In DS this gives some very effective close-assault tanks, but starts to
reduce the size/number of heavy main guns it carries.
In SG scale, they're usually fire linked so you can still move and fire. The
extra capacity required to turret them often means that they're exposed,
so as soon as you suppress the vehicle, its anti-infantry ability is
severely curtailed.
Brendan 'Neath Southern Skies
> -----Original Message-----
IMPORTANT 1. Before opening any attachments, please check for viruses.
2. This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential
information for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender and delete all copies of this email.
3. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and are
not a statement of Australian Government Policy unless otherwise stated. 4.
Electronic addresses published in this email are not conspicuous publications
and DVA does not consent to the receipt of commercial electronic messages.
5. Please go to http://www.dva.gov.au/feedback.htm#sub to unsubscribe
emails
of this type from DVA. 6. Finally, please do not remove this notice.
> On Wednesday 26 October 2005 00:38, Robertson, Brendan wrote:
I've found myself giving vehicles two or three APSW just to fill up the
capacity. Since a vehicle can only fire one weapon, and looses all weapons on
a 'systems down' result, I've rarely found that the limit on number of weapons
is a problem.