Grey_Elkhound

Ok, Thanks! The Header on the Damage Table Columns are MoS & the Resulting Damage. We had been checking for penetration using the MoS + RAV vs. the AV Rating, and if the hit exceeded the Armor, we used the initial MoS number rolled for the table result.

I know this topic is a year old at this point, and I'm hoping the answer #4 in CAVBOSS's response is to a previous incarnation of the rules, or I'm playing wrong. In the CAV:SO Hardback, Step 5A for resolving Ranged Assault, says, "If the combat roll was a "hit", the attacker will add the Margin of Success [from the Strike Point Roll] to the RAV of the weapon system that was used. This combined value is then compared to the defender's AV. If equal to or greater, refer to the ranged assault damage table (see p.62) and apply the result as indicated." The table on pg. 62 makes no mention of AV or RAV, just MOS. I've been playing that if MOS + RAV is greater than or equal to the AV, then you use the original strike point MoS as the Damage Indicator on the first column of the Ranged Assault Damage Table. Am I doing this wrong?

Hi All, I'm a returning CAV player, and have just ordered the new rule book so that I can introduce the new version to my local game group. When I played CAV v2, I thought that one of the main distractions for new players was the back and forth between the SA definitions in the rules and the Stat Sheets for each of the individual CAVs that were given to each player. As a result, I ended up putting together a modified stat sheet that had the vehicle stats, and included the model's photo & a simplified (game effect only) definition for each SA. I'd like to do the same thing again for the new rules, but I'm hoping someone has already done the work. Is there a more "new player-friendly" set of Stat Sheets out there that someone has put together for new players (I have the quick start & downloads from the CAVHQ Website)? In addition, has anyone put together a listing of the new SA definitions that could be used as a handout at games? Glad to see CAV is back and getting some love. Its a great game!

If the offer is still open, I'd like to take part in playtesting the next version of CAV. I've been hanging around the edges of CAV ever since I fell in love with the original demo games at Origins in the game's first year, and I'm happy to see that there is a plan to bring back CAV from a pretty extended dirtnap. I am in agreement with the previous poster in that I think there is a market for a good Combined Arms Sci-Fi Game, with clean, simple but not simplistic, and quick moving rules that provide a challenging game that can be finished in a 2-3 hour time frame.

Sounds like the Factions will do well with SA's - Will there be any Merc specific SA's? They are supposed to be the "Real Professionals" after all - You know....Blood and Gore and Veins in their teeth ....

I have been hanging around some of the discussions of the New CAV Edition coming "soon", and trying to decide how to go about organizing and painting the 30+ CAVs waiting in my painting queue, in order to minimize the disruption when the new game format comes out this summer. The best description that I have found so far is shown below: Factions: I think by now that we all know the game is moving towards alliegences with governments. The two sides in the 2nd Galaxy War will remain the same as in the first (Ritterlich/Adon/Malvernis vs. Rach/Templar/Terran), but even allies won't be getting along all that well. You will be able to play as a Freelancer unit in Tournament play tho (IE you can use any model, but don't get any faction bonuses) or a Merc in campaign play. I am the only player in my area and have painted the forces that I have as a Mercenary type unit, with about 2/3 in one color scheme and 1/3 in another scheme (to be used as an internal training opponent or general opponent since nobody else is supplying figures for the game). I have not really differentiated the sides by faction (either UCOR or Government). Will this continue to work, or am I going to need to rethink the organization more along Faction lines? Hoping for a heads-up from somebody more in the know than I, Thanks