soft-skinned vehicles
#1
Posted 17 May 2006 - 05:27 PM
#2
Posted 17 May 2006 - 05:40 PM
#3
Posted 20 May 2006 - 10:39 PM
#4
Posted 21 May 2006 - 06:25 PM
#5
Posted 21 May 2006 - 07:56 PM
#6
Posted 22 May 2006 - 04:03 PM
#7
Posted 22 May 2006 - 06:34 PM
Yes.I agree there is an issue with soft skin vehicles as you outlined Gregory. Actually this recommended change would effect all vehicles that have a F,S,R and T DV of 0 and not any vehicles with the occasional 0 on the T DV only.
Yes.The change would be very simple to implement using find and replace on the work book and in the modified values. Since there is a Soft skin section a majority of the changes would occur there. Another change that will have to be made is to Chapter 9 that details the stats for the tables. Again this would be simple. My question is what will do for us? Is this to denote the use the procedure you outlined previously with attacks against soft skinned vehicles?
Yes.My next question is if we use the HE FP value against the softskin vehicle are we still using the left side to-kill table?
Well, I thought it might be easy given the knowledge that folks bring with them, that soft-skinned vehicles have virtually no protection. In fact, it has given us more problems figuring out how to deal with this issue (50mm mortars "bouncing") than having a way to handle it.I tried to think of this in terms of a person approaching the game for the first time. If they see an 'S' in the DV table, that would trigger the knowledge that they do not use HE OV but HE FP. All other procedures remain the same. The problem with dropping the armor value may occur around the negative numbers of medium mortars for HE OV, and the higher values for small arms HE OV. I tried dropping the DV to '-2,' but that created problems around basic infantry HE OV's, and still did not give an adequate feel for the chance of a jeep, for example, to get knocked out from a mortar round. Also, somehow, nobody could wrap their minds around the "negative armor" concept.Bottom line is a well-placed mortar round should almost always disable a truck. That is why they never tried to go onto a battlefield.Cheers,GregoryIf so, this could instill a bit of confusion in a multi-target type environment with tanks, trucks and infantry involved. I can see the procedures get confused for the different types of targets and how they are attacked and killed. The system you describe is easy for us, well some of us anyway ( :lol: ), but this introduces a third way of dealing with a target. Is there any other way we can fix this within the current system? What about giving soft skin vehicles a consistent negative (-) armor value?
#8
Posted 22 May 2006 - 08:02 PM
Okay, that answers that question. ;) I can go along with this. Lets see if anyone else has some thoughts on this.I tried dropping the DV to '-2,' but that created problems around basic infantry HE OV's, and still did not give an adequate feel for the chance of a jeep, for example, to get knocked out from a mortar round. Also, somehow, nobody could wrap their minds around the "negative armor" concept.
#9
Posted 09 August 2007 - 02:17 PM
another source:The structural design of the DFS 230 was thoroughly conventional. The wing comprised a single main spar at approximately one-third chord with plywood covering forward and fabric the long-span ailerons with inset tabs were fabric covered, the wing was braced to the fuselage at quarter-span by light struts. The fabric-covered welded steel-tube fuselage was rectangular section, and built up on a central keel member, boom intended to absorb the impact loads transmitted to the sprung steel skid.
They were definitely susceptible to small arms fire. Any thoughts?GregoryIt was a lightweight glider made of tubing and fabric...
#10
Posted 10 August 2007 - 08:38 AM
#11
Posted 11 August 2007 - 09:34 AM
#12
Posted 13 August 2007 - 10:58 AM
#13
Posted 14 August 2007 - 07:33 AM
Well, not really. The difference here is this is an aircraft that lands with troops, like a truck. Other aircraft stay at altitude moving at speed under power. The dynamic is different, and the effect on firing upon them is certainly different. Gliders are lower, slower, (relatively) bigger, and suffered because of it. In the game that should be measureable.Perhaps it should have a DR=2, and if it takes a hit it should have the troops roll on the troop survival table? This could also be a Meine Truppen effect?GregoryWith that said I guess I'll have to redo ALL aircraft for MP. :)
#14
Posted 15 August 2007 - 07:52 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users