> On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 08:59:02 +1000 <Beth.Fulton@csiro.au> writes:
I think it should in most cases where both commanders are reasonably
competent.
I have to agree
> with him, combined arms and a mix of weapons really do make sense, for
True but I was (in my case) trying to reduce the homogenization factor of
different groups/nations.
> 2. Any individual enemy vehicle designed to be well-defended against
Well, depends if it's your force or your opponent's - I started to say
"his" but the distaff side of the hobby is growing... Right, Beth?
> 3. In a campaign setting, the more varied your forces, the more
Most earth forces of non-major powers probably don't anticipate fighting
in two widely divergent (Arctic and Sahara) environments with the major
components of their forces without time to re-equip (if nothing else
uniforms and personal equipment plus camo patterns.) Colonial Forces probably
would have less exotic options in their standard structure but be unlikely to
be capable of good performance in terrain dissimilar to the terrain they are
assigned to. Forces in a tropical zone probably don't have a lot of capability
in adapting to arctic conditions. Units
intended for inter-continental warfare more likely would need and have
that capability.
> Having said that, I can, for game purposes, see the validity in doing
Well, I don't like the odds of a size 5 going down due to evil chits. One game
the HEL force (already at a disadvantage tactically) at a key point rolled
wide margins (like 12 to 4, 10 to 2, that kind of rolling) of 'to hit' dice on
a couple of platoons of AFVs consecutively at critical positions in his attack
only to have 3 of the 6 vehicles (along with BOOM, damaged vehicle hits on
already damaged HVC using targets, and large amounts of damage numbers of the
right color) draw 'firing system down' chits! The other 3 had two mobility
hits (one multiple) on vehicles trying to hold a fixed victory point position
they had reached last turn and the other accumulated about 6 points, a damaged
vehicle and a firer's system down chit on a size 1 nuisance that was chewing
up his light units.
Don't like size 5 weapons at all.
> [quoted text omitted]
<snip>
Gracias,
G'day,
> Well, depends if it's your force or your opponent's - I started to say
> --- warbeads@juno.com wrote:
Even I found one...
OK, she's not a minis gamer, but I think I can change that.:P
> Colonial Forces
Backwards. Colonial Forces with a single brigade or division responsible for
an entire planet probably live and die by Semper Gumby!
Forces in a
> tropical zone probably
Why not? After all, while it's not quite that extreme, look at the deployments
of 10th Mountain from upstate New York to Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan... And
the 25th sent units to Cobra Gold (exercise in Thailand) and then off to
Afghanistan, and they are primarily tasked to support the war in Korea when it
breaks out again.
> Well, I don't like the odds of a size 5 going down
I don't like the 459 point price of a first-class size
4 tank. Size 3 is the workhorse of my force.
G'daym
> Even I found one. . .
Where there's life there's hope;)
Have fun
G'day,
More from Brian;)
Cheers
Beth
> [quoted text omitted]
> Warbeads Writes:
> Most earth forces of non-major powers probably don't >anticipate
It doesn't need to be as widely divergent as Arctic and Saharan (two example
which, while requiring widely divergent material for personnel survival,
equipment maintenance, etc, are actually pretty similar in terms of tactical
terrain) to require different types of tactics and
optimal technologies. How many non-major powers can expect to fight in
cities, hilly/mountainous terrain, plains, and woodlands?
> Colonial Forces
How well equipped and how diversely equipped they will need to be will depend
on several factors, somwe of which are based on assumptions I question. For
instance, just as many people (myself included) bristle
at the Star Wars-esque "Hoth-Tattooine Syndrome" (Entire planet all one
climate), I also question the assumption that each planet will be colonized by
one power. I tend to favor the "Planet X has colonies belonging to powers 1,
2, & 3, while planet Y has coloniee of 3, 4, & 5, and Planet Z colonies of
1,5, 6, & 7" model.
> Well, I don't like the odds of a size 5 going down due to evil chits.
I'm firmly in Oerjan's camp when it comes to thinking the SD:F is way
too overpowering and not all that realistic. If/When the're removed
from the equation, the MDC 5's range means that for anything but HEL's and
other MDC 5's, it gets a chance to get in its own licks for at least a turn
before any other system starts hitting back.
Having said that, if you're averse to 5's, I'd still prefer MDC's to any
of the other systems on the board -- it gives the best balance between
range and firepower. An HEL of the same class will have better range,
but poorer firepower in close. A DFFG has the opposite problem --
better firepower, but worse range. As for the GMS option, I think that the
only downside to it is the fact that the GMS is the one system that
has the most defensive systems that protect against it -- PDS, ADS, ECM,
Reactive Armor, APFC's. Against other weapons? Stealth. That's it, and
it's overpriced. If you know you're facing an all-GMS force, you give
everyone Superior stealth, PDS & reactive armor (or better yet, APFC's if you
know he used infantry in attendance), toss in a couple of ADS vehicles, and
you've significantly diminished your opponents effectiveness, probably by more
than the loss of offense you suffer by buying those defenses.
Of course, the fact that they require different countermeasures than DF
weapons does make GMS a very effective second punch when compined with other
systems.
> There are only two 'energy' weapons - DFFG and HEL right?
Right, but as you've shown, there are different ways to configure your
force even with those two options -- seeing as we both came up with
quite different answers.
> --- Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> How many non-major powers can expect to fight in
Actually, most nations the size of Germany have most of those terrains.
Everyone has cities. Any extrasolar colony will have agricultural areas.
Hills... well, most mines will be in hills, and so on.
Actually, if you were to fight from the English Channel all the way to the
north of Scotland you'd have those terrains and more. Never mind a
properly-sized country, like Texas.
> I'm firmly in Oerjan's camp when it comes to
True.
> Of course, the fact that they require different
They are also much lighter weight (require less capacity points) so can be
added as a secondary
anti-armor system for vehicles for which this is not a
priority. Like IFVs.
G'day,
And some more on mixed tech from Biran.
Cheers
Beth
> Brians response's
> John Atkinson wrote:
> --- Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
(on my behalf)
> How many non-major powers can expect to fight in
> Actually, most nations the size of Germany have most
My point exactly. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
And to save on the number of posts:
> John Atkinson wrote:
> Well, I don't like the odds of a size 5 going down
> I don't like the 459 point price of a first-class size
Having a few size 5 weapons around is nice, though -- especially for the
added range. I prefer a platoon or two of class 4 Heavies with MDC 5's, and
the rest of my forces use size 3 or smaller, mostly Grav. On them, the weapon
system depends on their mission.