I have now played 4 SG games and now have a few questions.
First of all is there a FAQ or any thing like that out there?
Can GMS launchers be fired at dispersed targets? If so do you treat it like a
support weapon except that it has to be fired separately? Does EW have to
active to effect the EW die? Does it cost an EW marker?
Are there any limitations placed an an EW trooper, like on movement or fire
combat?
The SG book differes with the Quick Reference card on what to do with a dummy
counter on a Minor success for a Observation roll, which one is correct?
Well I will probably come up with more questions later.
Thanks Tim
> Timothy Pricer wrote:
I don't believe there's a FAQ per se, but check out
http://stargrunt.virtualave.net/
> Can GMS launchers be fired at dispersed targets?
> From what I recall from the discussion a few months back, no.
Except we like to allow it in our games. If you can aim a missile at a tank,
you can aim it at the ground...
> If so do you treat it like a support weapon except that it has to
Seeing that it isn't covered in the rules, this makes sense. d8 for impact, as
per the rules on p.40
> Does EW have to active to effect the EW die?
Yes
> Does it cost an EW marker?
Yes. One to start using EW, each other marker to increase die type. (p.52)
> Are there any limitations placed an an EW trooper, like on movement or
Not that I'm aware of. My EW warfare guy is in my command squad, usually, so I
try to keep them away from really heavy fire.
> The SG book differes with the Quick Reference card on what to do with
I don't know, because I only have my rulebook at work...
> Well I will probably come up with more questions later.
Not nearly as many as if you were playing $40K...
> Thanks
You're welcome,
> First of all is there a FAQ or any thing like that out there?
No but see meta FAQ for resources
The GZG FAQ is available at:
http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/estate/ax16/grunt/meta-faq.html
> Can GMS launchers be fired at dispersed targets?
This question opens a big can of worms. We had a debate on this list sometime
within the last month or so all about this topic. If you look
back through old list postings (or digest archives - I forget the
website
for the archives - maybe somebody else can post it please??), you'll
see.
Basically, one side of the argument is that NO you can't, because the warhead
is designed for anti armour and you would have to be REALLY lucky to actually
hit a single trooper in a dispersed infantry formation. A near miss would
probably not do much damage, since the warhead is a shaped charge. The rules
say that you fire a GMS using the guidance vs. the target's ECM, but infantry
doesn't have an ECM rating.
The other side of the argument is that if an IAVR (anti armour shaped charge
warhead, but unguided) can be used against infantry, why can't a GMS? The GMS
is going to cause *some* kind of damage if it hits close to a trooper, even if
just by shrapnel. Personally, I think that there should
be *some* chance of a GMS doing damage to infantry - and our group plays
it that way. There is no "definitive" yes or no answer to this in the rules,
though...
> If so do you treat it like a support weapon except that it has to
And use 12" rangebands, or something like that. Normally the size of your
rangebands are determined by the unit quality, but with a GMS, we thought you
should have *some* benefit from the enhanced guidance and sighting systems,
but at the same time shouldn't have the "across the table" sort of
unlimited range they normally do. So use 12" rangebands, and the
defender
uses range/cover modifiers as normal.
For firepower, use the guidance die type, and the unit quality die as normal.
That's how we do it, and it works well.
> Are there any limitations placed an an EW trooper, like on movement
No restrictions stated in the rules.
> The SG book differes with the Quick Reference card on what to do with
I would tend to say "default to the rulebook" for stuff like this.
These are questions that would be well suited to an "official" FAQ. Maybe if
we bug Jon T enough we can set an "offical" FAQ up on somebody's website
- the GZG on-line catalogue site, maybe???
Hope this helps.
> Timothy Pricer wrote:
<snip>
> > Can GMS launchers be fired at dispersed targets?
<snip>
Now, I see a problem with allowing GMSs to fire at non-hard
targets. Below is why, and I do look forward to exploring this topic further:
1) GMSs or any other AT type missile system is designed to do a
specific job - kill tanks!
2) The specific nature of missile systems is to use shaped charges.
A little explanation on these two items: The specific job of the missile
system is to destroy an armored target. To do that the missile must first
penetrate the armor using it's impact force to bore a tiny hole in the armor
before the 'real' warhead enters though that little hole. The missiles are not
equipped with 'high explosive' type wareheads, which would then have an effect
on dispersed targets, but since the charge is shaped and designed to penetrate
armor, you will not be getting an explosion out of them that would effect
combatants near the target point. If that missile was targeted at a person,
even wearing power armor, you looking at nuking that one person and that is
it.
The whole idea behind armor killers is to get enough shrapnel inside the
turret or other compartment to detonate the munitions inside the armor. That
will dampen the crew's day every time.
If you were to have choosable loads for the same delivery system, then you may
be talking a different game then. But allowing a missile system to target the
ground near a figure and using that as a 'blast point' then using the same
missiles to fire at hard targets is flat out wrong. You should at the very
least spend an action to load the 'type' of round into the weapon, then if a
hard target presents itself when there is an
HE type round loaded - then 'Oh well...'.
That's my $.02 on the subject.
> In a message dated 5/7/99 11:03:17 AM EST, scspieker@ncweb.com writes:
<< The whole idea behind armor killers is to get enough shrapnel inside the
turret or other compartment to detonate the munitions inside the armor. That
will dampen the crew's day every time. >>
Actually the kinetic energy behind the missile flight is no where enought to
drive it THROUGH any armore at all. the shaped charged detonates on contact
(with the exception of HESH[high explosive squash heads]) the HEAT (high
explosive anti-tank) burns at intense heat and chemically BURNS its way
through the armor creating a near plasma temprature flow of explosive, tank
armor and missile parts that splashes through the inside of the vehicle
killing crew and destroying or ignitingsotres and systems in the vehicle. The
whole thing is chemical in nature. There are two ways through armor kinetic
energy to drive a projectile through the armor (again it expands a super
heated fog of tank and pentrator constituents into the tank ahead of it, but
its the kinetic energy of the round which penetrates) OR it relies on
incendiaries to melt its way through the armor.
<snip>
This topic in game terms was discussed at some length recently. Check out the
list archives.
> A little explanation on these two items: The specific job of
<snip>
Well..... not to be picky, but this is mostly wrong. Antitank rounds from
a tank gun penetrate using impact force (kinetic energy) - saboted
tungsten or depleted uranium hypersonic penetrators literally punch through
armour, causing damage by impact and because of the superheated molten metal
that sprays into the interior of the vehicle.
Some missiles may be able to kill an armoured vehicle with impact force alone,
but they are not usually designed to. I've heard stories of the Israeli
Airforce taking the warheads out of their Maveric antitank missiles to save
money after discovering that a hit on the top armour of typical soviet tanks
with a dud missile would kill the tank anyway. But if you're talking killing a
modern armoured vehicle (in the SG universe, anyway) with a side or front hit,
ie from an infantry fired missile system, you won't be
able to do it with kinetic energy alone - unless there are some BIG
changes in propulsion technology.
"Shaped Charge" warheads do use high explosive, and the warhead is not
designed to penetrate the armour and then explode. This is simplifying it a
bit, but the warhead is composed of high explosive that is shaped in such a
way that the majority of the force of the explosion is directed at a
small area at the point of impact with the armour - think of it like a
parabolic mirror reflecting light onto a small spot. The superhot jet of metal
and gas punches a small hole through the armour, and kills the vehicle by
cooking off the ammo, fuel, crew, equipment, or destroying the engine, etc.
I've left out some of the details, but that's basically how it works.
Noice that I said "the majority" of the explosive force is directed at the
armour. Not all of it, however. There is going to be some force, shrapnel, etc
(shockwaves even) that will spread out from the explosion. If there are
infantry in close proximity to this, they could very well be injured.
Hence, in game terms, my group allows GMS shots against dispersed targets, but
they don't do very much. FP same as guidance, Impact d8, and that's it.