Hull/Armor:
The "lots of hull" is not larger it is more durable. One could model this in
DS2 by 1 of 2 methods:
1) All KV AFV's are allowed to have up to an armor level = size + 1.
2) All KV AFV's take 1 additional point to kill (Size 2 vehicle takes 3 points
of valid color chit damage to kill). Vehicle cost should then be 1.2 * normal
total. In either case, a boom should still be a boom.
Weapons:
I would agree that, KV should have a different size/cost for weapons. KV
seem to have placed all thier eggs in one basket for weapons. So:
HKP, MDC: -1 size for fit (min. 1, max. 5)
APSW: Normal
All Other weapons: +1 size for fit
PDS: +1 size for fit
ECM: x2 cost Stealth: Normal (They just by more than most Human armies)
I would suggest that the KV would have higher stealth (hunter motif), but less
ECM and PDS, as they tend to favor kinetic guns (MDC, HKP) instead of missiles
(extrapolating from FT). Also, at the beginning, they would probably not have
ablative or reactive armor.
-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
http://members.xoom.com/rlyehable/ds2/
Several people have gone the route of making KV weapons take up space 1 level
smaller than their class, specifically for HKP's and MDC's. The problem is,
this effectively limits the KV to 4 classes in these weapons. Thatr's because
class 1 and class 2 weapons would be the same suize, so why bother ever
mounting a class 1? Instead, I suggest that the DS II K Guns draw 1 extra
damage chit. Thus, a class 1 K Gun would draw 2 chits, a Class 2 would draw 3,
etc... Admittedly, this means a class 5 K Gun would draw 6 chits. As a human
player, this does scare several things out of me, including excrement AND
theological realms of punishment. However, it seems to fit the description of
the KV. Just make sure you increase their COST by one weapons class as well.
As for making all other weapons 1 size larger than their damage, came up with
an alternative. Instead of adding 1 to the weapons class before calculating
fit, increase the modifiers for these weapons to x4 for turrets, and x3 for
fixed arc and secondary weapons. I did the math on this, it would give class 1
and 2 weapons less of a disadvantage than your idea, make class 3 about the
same as yours, and make class 4 and 5 weapons much more disadvantaged. In game
terms, class 1 and 2's would be just a bit larger
than their human counterparts, while the class 3-5 weapons would be
grotesquely bulky - which seems fitting for a technology with which the
KV are not yet familiar.
Here's a question that all this disparity (both ways) in weapons tech brings
up: HOw will people deal with campaigns and the ability of both sides to
reverse-engineer each others' tech from captured units?
Brian B
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Bell, Brian K" <Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil>
Reply-To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
To: "'gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU'" <gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: RE: KV Vehicle Design Philosophy
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 07:48:06 -0400
Weapons:
I would agree that, KV should have a different size/cost for weapons. KV
seem to have placed all thier eggs in one basket for weapons. So:
HKP, MDC: -1 size for fit (min. 1, max. 5)
APSW: Normal
All Other weapons: +1 size for fit