Submitted for comments: Kra'Vak TO&E for Stargrunt
Goals: Make a TO&E for the Kra'Vak using only the figures available in the GZG
Stargrunt 15mm Kra'Vak line (see
http://www.cygnusx1.info/images/sg2/sg15-k.jpg) with only minor
modifications.
Disclaimer: Many terms are borrowed from previous work by Robert Deakin, Tom
Barclay and Los.
Terminology: Pack: Platoon Equivilent Arm: Squad Equivilent Claw: Team
Equivilent Mandible: Specalist Arm or Team
KV Clan
3-5 Cadres
3-5 Space Cadres
KV Cadre
3-5 Hunting Families
2-4 Armored Hunting Families
1-2 Aerospace Hunting Families
KV Hunting Family: 3x Hunter Packs Mandibles (specail squads attached to packs
as needed):
- EW Claws
- Farseer (Forward Observer) Claws
- Sniper Claws
- Anti-Armor Claw
- Air Defense Claw
- Medevac Claws
- Mortar Claws
- Engineering Claws
Hunting Pack: Skull
- HQ Claw
- - Hunt Leader
- - Pack Ears (Comms)
- - Pack Eyes (EW)
- - Sia'Na
- 1st Claw (Elite)
- - Hunt Sub-Leader
- - Warrior
- - Warrior
- - Warrior/SAW
- APC
1st Arm
- 2nd Claw (Veteran)
- - Arm Leader
- - Warrior
- - Warrior
- - Warrior/AT
- 3rd Claw (Regular)
- - Claw Leader
- - Warrior
- - Warrior
- - Warrior/SAW
- APC
2nd Arm
- 4th Claw (Regular)
- - Arm Leader
- - Warrior
- - Warrior
- - Warrior/AT
- 5th Claw (Regular)
- - Claw Leader
- - Warrior
- - Warrior
- - Warrior/SAW
- IFV
3rd Arm
- 6th Claw (Juvenile)
- - Arm Leader (Regular)
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile/AT
- - Juvenile/SAW
- 7th Claw (Juvenile)
- - Claw Leader (Juvenile)
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile
- - Juvenile/AT
- - Juvenile/SAW
Power Armor Arm
- 1st Power Armor Claw
- - Arm Leader (Symbolic Axe)
- - PA Warrior
- - PA Warrior/+Scatterpack (in addition to normal PA weapon)
- 2nd Power Armor Claw
- - Claw Leader
- - PA Warrior/AT
- - PA Warrior/+Scatterpack
Scout Claw (also doubles as forward observers).
- Scout Rider (Leader)
- Scout Rider
- Scout Rider
Equipment: Warriors:
- Warrior Weapon: FP:3 I:d12*
- Claw Support Weapon: FP:d10 I:d12*
- Claw Anti-Armor Weapon: FP:- I:2xd12* Guidence:Quality
3 Shot, Range Band = 12" * Size of target
- Juve Weapon: FP:2 I:d12
- Juve SAW FP:d8 I:d12
- Juve Anti-Armor: FP:- I:d12* Guidence: Quality
- Scout Weapon: FP:2 I:d8*
- PA Weapon: FP:d10 I:d12*
- PA Anti-Armor: FP:- I:2xd12* Guidence: Enhanced
3 Shot, Range Band = 12" * Target size
- PA Scatterpack FP:d12 I:d10* Close only. Shift up
2 in close assault. Skatterpacks also have smoke dischargers.
- PA: Kra'Vak Power Armor has a large stealth capability. It masks
IR and EM emmissions. It also is covered in LCDs, computer controlled, that
assign colors based on the bacground from 1028 different angles. This gives
them the ability to do concealed movement (like a sniper) (p.27). It also give
them the ability to go into hiding (p.27) like a sniper, but need only minimal
cover (can do it in the open if not in direct LOS).
I like Tom and Los idea of the KV as stealthy. They accomplish this using an
Elite Hunter (I forget the correct term). This is represented by Eureka's
Intergalatic Bounty Hunter. Unfortunatly, this is not
available in 15mm. :-( So, I have tried to accomplish the same thing
using Power Armor. The Kra'Vak PA is very retro looking. For an advanced
civiliation (better starship engines than humans), it was somewhat strange. I
looked closer and realized that they were completely covered. And it was not
too far a jump to decide that this is to mask heat and other EM radiation.
Pushing a little farther (and pulling from the original MT text about the
Kra'Vak ships shifting color) I added colorchange ability to the armor. Now
the Power Armor can be stealthy,
replacing the (missing) Elite Hunter. I am also using Tom/Los' idea
of jueveniles being easier to succumb to Ro'Kah. Thus, they are placed in
larger claws and considered somewhat expendable (6th & 7th Claws are always
adding new members). However every Hunting Family has a Sia'Na to help calm
the troops.
Confidence Levels:
CO: Controlled - Any Action
ST: Steady - Any Action
SH: Shaken - Test or Ro'Kah if enemy is in Close or 2nd Range band.
BR: Brink of Ro'Kah - Test or Ro'Kah if any ememy in LOS.
RO: Ro'Kah Over - Must withdraw, no fire unless fired upon.
Ro'Kah: A unit in Ro'Kah must attack the closest enemy in sight and attempt to
close with it until they can close assault it. If no enemy is in
sight, they must test (at +3) or attack each other (other members of the
Claw). If no enemy is in sight, they combat move a random direction in an
attempt to find an enemy. While in Ro'Kah, they DOUBLE thier normal close
combat score (PA in Ro'Kah QUADRUPLE thier score). At the end of every round
of Ro'Kah, the unit will test. If they succeed, they are no longer under
Ro'Kah, but immediatly drop confidence to RO (Ro'Kah Over).
Non-Power Armor Kra'Vak under Ro'Kah also double thier normal movement
allowance. Kra'Vak under Ro'Kah shift thier armor type down 1 (as they are not
using cover, or attempting to dodge fire).
Comments encouraged/welcomed.
---
> "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" wrote:
"Pack"? Doesn't seem to fit with the other designations.
Leg for a transport troop/APC unit?
G'day,
This is less a criticism and more a question/observation...I notice that
you split the juves from the warriors. I may be way wrong, but hasn't there
been comments in the past that this approach doesn't work (for humans) or have
I got it arse about and "diluting" squads with green troops is a bad thing?
> The Kra'Vak PA is very retro looking. For an
Well to human eyes anyway, to KV it may be the swishest thing since sliced....
whatever the KV equivalent of bread is;)
> Confidence Levels:
I like this (!!) as it avoids the "will fight to way past when I should
sensibly have left" problem.
> Ro'Kah:
I can see why you do this, but its probably worth noting that even in the
preds that do attack "family" members it tends to be toned down vs attacks
they would carry out on "non-family". Maybe its worth inserting a rule
that a KV injured in one of these attacks only dies on a 1, rather than a
1-2.
Cheers
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002 12:51 AM, Bell, Brian K (Contractor)
> [SMTP:Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil] wrote:
Why the difference between warrior and juve weaponry? It would make logistics
a pain. I also note you have the Warrior, PA and Scout weapons capable of
point fire
vs vehicles. Any particular reason? Normally only GMS/P, IAVR and
class-1
support weapons are capable of this sort of vehicle kill.
[quoted original message omitted]
[quoted original message omitted]
> "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" wrote:
[snip, snap, snop]
> [snip]
Juvenile KV
> are subject to Ro'Kah at a higher rate. Thus, Juves tend to make a lot
I have an opposite vision re: the number of offspring they have. But
that's just me. ;-)
However, a suggestion to address the lack of GMS/IAVR. Why not "create"
a new weapon system for them that *acts* kinda like a GMS/IAVR, but is
not interceptable by anti-GMS weaponry? "Base" it on the whole K-gun,
HKP, MDC penetrating weapon theory. The KV have got to have armored vehicles
themselves (okay, maybe they don't *have* to), and likely
will have encountered them, so should have heavy-enough duty weaponry
to deal with those things. This could be in addition to the infantry
weapons being somewhat more effective against soft/lightly armored
targets.
Suggestions-(not-always-great)-R-Us,
[quoted original message omitted]
Indy said:
> I have an opposite vision re: the number of offspring they have. But
I subscribe to the "lots of expendable juves out front, experienced warriors
manning the support weapons" theory.
> However, a suggestion to address the lack of GMS/IAVR. Why not "create"
a new weapon system for them that *acts* kinda like a GMS/IAVR, but is
not interceptable by anti-GMS weaponry? "Base" it on the whole K-gun,
HKP, MDC penetrating weapon theory. The KV have got to have armored vehicles
themselves (okay, maybe they don't *have* to)
Doesn't Jon have KV tanks listed in the catalog?
> "laserlight@quixnet.net" wrote:
I have some of the older ones of DSII scale. I put the parenthetical
in for those folks who don't see the KV with tanks. Mine have 'em. ;-)
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002 11:04 PM, Bell, Brian K (Contractor)
> [SMTP:Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil] wrote:
Juvenile KV
> are subject to Ro'Kah at a higher rate. Thus, Juves tend to make a lot
Small arms already penetrate armour class 0 and 1 (read SG: Small Arms vs
Point targets), so you don't need to designate them as armour piercing. As you
wrote them, KV small arms can potentially take out an armour 5 heavy tank with
a lucky roll.
Am I reading the rules wrong?
I thought that the asterisk (*) doubles the impact roll on major hits, but
were still considered small arms (i.e. not heavy
weapons -- RFAC/1, MDC/5, etc.). And thus were more effective
against armor than weapons without an asterisk, but leff effective than heavy
weapons.
My reading would also explain the value of strength 1 heavy weapons when the
rating of asterisk weapons often seem higher.
G'day,
> [Bri] In JT's original description of Ro'Kah
That's fine, I was just doubting that when it actually happened you'd end up
getting the same rate of deaths from this in an intraclan "misguided clash"
as seen in interspecies/interclans attacks.
Cheers
I indicated a +3 to the check. This was in error.
I should have stated that "...if no enemy is in
LOS, they make a reaction check at TL -1; if they
fail they attack the nearest friendly unit if any are in assault range, or
fight among themselves if not."
On Thursday, April 18, 2002 8:54 PM, Bell, Brian K (Contractor)
> [SMTP:Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil] wrote:
The asterix (*) denotes it can be used as a dedicated point fire weapon; hence
on a minor hit it does base damage and on a major hit, does double damage,
AGAINST ANY ARMOUR VALUE. Normal small arms fire against point targets; on a
minor hit causes suppression, on a major hit does base damage against armour 0
and 1 vehicles only (don't have my books handy for exact quotes).
This is a major distinction, which is why only a couple of infantry weapons
are marked so; IAVR, GMS/P, AutoGL etc.
[quoted original message omitted]
On Friday, April 19, 2002 8:52 PM, Bell, Brian K (Contractor)
> [SMTP:Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil] wrote:
> targets? Quality and d4 (for no FCS) using the 'heavy weapons fire at
As written; Quality + FP. They are still small arms, but the damage
results use the heavy weapon results process instead of bouncing off heavier
armours.