Underwater Rules - SG (long)

15 posts ยท Apr 17 2000 to Apr 19 2000

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 14:53:46 +1000

Subject: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

G'day again,

And lastly the SG suggestions

Beth

> [quoted text omitted]
STARGRUNT SUGGESTIONS There are probably fewer modifications necessary for SG
than DS, but here are a few thoughts...

Mission Motivation: Working in a foreign medium does nothing for the nerves,
you have always got to have that little extra edge in the back of your mind,
and if you don't then it reaches up and bites you on the butt..... Thus all
reaction
tests have an additional +1 to the threat level (except for the 'sniper
going into hiding test' which is as normal) as do the confidence tests done as
a part of a close assault.

Mobility and Terrain Effects: It would probably be quite OK to use the
existing movement regimes for infantry seeing as the biggest differences would
be vs vehicles rather than other infantry types (i.e. less obvious than in
DS). The only change to this would be that if they're actually exiting the
water (i.e. have stood up or are dolphining out of the surf zone), then their
movement rates will be down 2 die types (with 'normal troops actually moving
only 2" and rolling a D4 and counting the result as a 1 on a 1 or 2 and a 2 on
a 3 or 4).

Vehicle base movement now becomes 6" for wheeled vehicles and 12" for
everything else but GRAV and boats which go 15".

The terrain effects on mobility and ambient weather conditions are as
given/assumed above for DS.

Spotting: As normal, but the die type is shifted up one for every 6" rather
than
every 12" and if the water is turbid then unaided vision has a -1 to the
roll.

Weaponry: Missile fire is not effected by the fact its underwater (they're
assumed to be missiles modified for fire underwater or actually torpedos),
however
other weapons are effected. There is an extra (cover-like) die shift to
the
target die for targets of non-missile fire; these shifts are as follows:
WEAPON SHIFT to Target Die
Small Arms - close only UP 3
Small Arms = rifles UP 2 SAWs UP 2 Infantry Plasma Gun UP 1 RFAC UP 3 HVC UP 2
GAC UP 2 MDC UP 1 DFFG UP 1 HEL UP 1 if clear water UP 2 if coastal UP 4 if
turbid

Heavy weapon range bands are also reduced to 8" x target size

Hit Effects: If vehicles are penetrated but not destroyed (i.e. disabled) then
roll again and if firer exceeds target's armour die then the vehicle begins to
flood, if not repaired in 2 turns then it must be abandoned (if the crew can't
escape it they're dead).

The effects of an explosion underwater can be pretty devastating to the
surrounding area too. Thus ANY unit (friend or foe) within 6" of a vehicle
that has been destroyed or a successful (fully effective) missile, or
explosive artillery, strike potentially suffers a hit too. Repeat the fire
resolution as if the unit was the actual target, but with an extra UP 1 (if
this would make it impossible to hit them then give them a suppression
regardless).

Medical Treatment:
Unsuited infantry who are wounded must be moved to land/surface the very
next activation or they are considered deceased. Suited infantry or wounded in
vehicles may survive longer than their unsuited comrades, however, they're
still in a dangerous medium and the sooner they're treated the
better, so there is a -1 to the treatment roll for every turn that has
elapsed since they were wounded (i.e. if its been 3 turns then there is a
-3 etc).

DFO: Surface vessels may also use DFO, these must be placed along the path
moved by the vessel that turn, but don't forget that anything caught in the
burst radius is effected (i.e. watch you don't catch yourself).

Dropping off troops: Troops may drop from craft hovering about the surface as
if dropping onto a clear plain on land (you can still hurt yourself pretty
badly dropping into the water so the WOUNDED on a 1 still stands), drops are
not allowed within 6" of a reef or turbulence zone.

Troops exiting a vehicle underwater can only do that if the vehicle is taking
flood damage (well I guess if you exited a healthy vehicle it'd end up flooded
anyway and so be useless) or if the vehicle is identified as having a 'dive
pool' before the game (purpose built marine APCs are assumed to have these
automatically). Firing troops out torpedo tubes is not advised.

Wildlife: There's even more scope for the interaction of troops and wildlife
at this scale than any other so a few ideas (along the lines of those given
for FT and DS) are given here too.

Leviathans could do a lot to mess up a good battle plan, especially if they
get in the road. While they would most likely steer clear of a battle in full
swing, they may just happen to be caught in the middle when one starts. On the
flip side, quite a part from accidental encounters aquatic predators may be
drawn to battle sites. They could be of any size, though even the really
impressive ones would be probably only have a fairly low armour class (its not
impossible for them to be some chitinous monster from another realm, but its
more likely they'll be more lightly armoured so they have greater mobility).
They'd have to be in contact with a squad or vehicle to 'attack' it, I'd given
them a weapon the same size as they are (to reflect the actions of bulk as
much as anything) with a (just for
e.g)
Firepower die of D8 and an Impact of D10 (this is really up for grabs though
and would depend on the nature of the beast, its size, any teeth etc it had or
whether it was just hitting you with its size). Packs of smaller animals would
be better represented as a squad close assaulting with the equivalent of
knives or something.

Fouling wildlife (like jellyfish etc which entangle but may also sting) is
dangerous especially if encountered in swarms. As stated for DS, these would
move with the currents and if they end on the same spot as a unit then they
will smother it. Vehicles and PA don't take wounds, but they are hampered and
take a suppression. Unsuited infantry suffer an attack, as if fired upon by a
full strength squad with 'improvised firearms' at close range. Furthermore,
swarms of any kind needn't contact troops to hamper operations and dense
schools of small 'fish' etc could be counted as additional soft cover if they
got into the line of fire.

From: Conchart@g... <conchart@geotec.net>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 17:29:24 -0500

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

I just had to ask, does any one else think fighting under water against
someone using plasma or laser weapons would be scary as hell? I mean, can you
imagine the water disturbances, hissing and crackling, just plain fearful
sight such weapons would have in the lurid deep? Maybe you should count
infantry plasma guns as terror weapons while under water, I cant think how to
represent this effect anywhere else, but I thought I'd mention it.

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 09:25:37 +1000

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

G'day Jade,

> I just had to ask, does any one else think fighting under water against

Oh yeah, but based on what welding torches do it'd be pretty visually
spectacular too!

> Maybe you should

I did have thoughts along those lines, but then I just thought that was the
chicken in me who thinks plasma is always damn scary so I guess I over
compensated;)

> I cant think how to represent this effect anywhere else, but I thought

Nope sounds cool, thanks.

Beth

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 18:38:47 PDT

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

I was thinking you could count plasma weapons as suicide weapons -
wouldn't they react violently with the water, and damned too close to the end
of the barrel from which they had been fired? I could be wrong, I'm sure I'll
know soon if I am.

Brian B

> From: "Conchart@geotec.net" <conchart@geotec.net>

From: Conchart@g... <conchart@geotec.net>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 20:41:52 -0500

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

The water would react violently, the plasma would lose energy, thus effective
range(all though realistically, as long as it's still in the plasma state it's
still effective). Anyway, plasma would superheat the water as soon as it
touched it, so it would continue on it's marry way leaving a trail of
superheated steam and possibly some vacuum behind it.

Jade Tseng

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 18:59:32 PDT

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

And this superheated steam (And possibly vacuum) wouldn't have any detrimental
effect on the firing unit?

Brian Bilderback

> From: "Conchart@geotec.net" <conchart@geotec.net>

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 22:50:41 -0400

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

> Brian Bilderback wrote:

Depends. I mean hell, the backblast on a plasma rifle is pretty fuckin'
intense even in regular air. In Traveller, it was generally lethal unless the
firer had at least full combat armor, and it was more normal
for plasma/fusion-armed units to wear battle dress (power armor).  So if
the firers are in full environmental armor tough enough to stop 4mm HV rounds,
then why would a little steam bother it?

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 13:12:47 +1000

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

G'day Brian,

> And this superheated steam (And possibly vacuum) wouldn't have any

While you make a sound point, I tend to agrre with John on this one <alright
Atkinson don't fall off your perch it does happen occassionally;)>, I would've
thought only troops in PA could've fired the thing in the first place so there
shouldn't be any extra penalty underwater as far as I can figure, but then as
I stressed before what I know about engineering could be written on the head
of the pin in the hand of angel who's dancing on the original pin.

Cheers

Beth

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 23:18:14 -0400

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

> And this superheated steam (And possibly vacuum) wouldn't have

Likely it would, but I can't see a plasma gun having enough effective range
under water to be worth bothering with anyway. The energy would all get
absorbed creating steam, within a fairly short distance, I'd think. Perhaps if
there's a viable laser wavelength that water won't absorb? But I'd think you'd
mostly be working with missiles/torpedoes.

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 23:44:30 -0400

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

> Beth Fulton wrote:

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 14:52:44 +1000

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

G'day,

> Likely it would, but I can't see a plasma gun having enough

I do think torpedos/missiles would be the primary weapon, if the
engagement was in clear ocean waters then blue lasers would reach 100s of
metres, in coastal waters its green light for a few tens of metres, and in
turbid estuaries you could use a red laser or you could just spit as that'd go
further - except of course if you had your visor down....;)

Cheers

Beth

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 15:01:40 +1000

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

G'day John,

> Gee. . . I'm floored. Next you'll admit the Persians are a bunch of

I needed a good laugh;)

Beth

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 08:09:51 PDT

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

This is the same objection that was raised by a friend of mine who is not on
the list. He works for a company that researches such things. Mind you, my
knowledge of such matters makes even Beth seem like a world authority on the
matter, but he said something about the fact that water isd an excellent

diffuser of heat causing major problems with the use of a plasma weapon
underwater.

> From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@quixnet.net>

From: Conchart@g... <conchart@geotec.net>

Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 22:38:24 -0500

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

Gee, I really meant to send this to the list the first time, so I'll fix that
this time. Your friend is right if you are using a high grade plasma(something
relatively easy to push into a plasma state) but a low grade plasma would be
so full of energy, that rather than a big ball of steam, you'd end up with big
ball of oxygen and hydrogen plasma surrounded with superheated steam
surrounded with superheated water, and probably still some of the low grade
plasma at the core when it got to it's target. I'm saying that in the water
you could probably switch from your standard plasma load up to a low grade
plasma load for the plasma weapons, the stuff might definately be too
dangerous to use in a gaseous atmosphere, but it might just work in water,
where normal plasma would quickly turn into so much boiling water. So, in
closing, I think plasma weapons could be used effectively under water, though
a point was made that it would almost definately have to be used by atleast
full body armored troops if not powered armor due to how hot the water around
the person fireing it would get. I'd work the physics out for you, but I don't
have my tables with me and I don't feel like looking them up on the net.:)

Jade Tseng

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>

Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 23:13:31 PDT

Subject: Re: Underwater Rules - SG (long)

Thanks, I was wondering why the heck my reply wasn't posting....

As for the rest of what you said, I'll have to give it some thought....

> From: "Conchart@geotec.net" <conchart@geotec.net>