Jump to content

How Coy is a Cruise Missle


Forlorn Hope
 Share

Recommended Posts

In preparing for an upcoming game (my third!) I have equipped the Forlorn Hope with some Cruise Missiles, which I would like very much to make BTB with some of SGT. Crunch's Rach CAVs ::D:

 

The question I have is how coy/sly/intelligent does everyone treat a cruise missle as being. It seems like the rules state briefly that they can take two move actions per activation, which means that they don't have to move full amount, they don't have to go straight for the enemy, etc. At some point I can imagine the FIST model controlling the thing (I guess so that it can approach behind terrain or something), but very soon this becomes comical (the missle will hide behind a rock, waiting until an enemy comes within range, the missile will wait right behind a freindly CAV and attack anyone who comes close, etc.). Of course I wouldn't use a missile in this way because it is goofy, but the line is fuzzy and I wondered if this has come up for some of the other players on the list.

 

Apologies if this has been covered, I couldn't find it with a basic search.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 13
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

In CAV 1, the missiles had to use their full movement each turn. That was left out/overlooked in CAV 2. However, a missile that's just standing around, waiting, is 1) not a very good use of points and 2) bound to get wasted if the opposing player has any IA around, especially if they have a CFP handy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would seem that unless you're playing on a largish table or launch in the first turn, the missile will most likely make to the target in at least the second, if not the first, turn it's on the table. I've often wondered the same thing though, as there is nothing in the rules preventing a cruise missile from hiding under an overpass then darting out at a target.

 

*note to self, build an overpass terrain piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have actually used a 'layered' attack with cruise missiles, launching them one turn, and using the recon rule to bury the missiles card in the second turn that way I had a chance to maneuver an air unit into position to attack the same enemy. The timing is really iffy and I have only had it work the way I wanted it to a couple of times, but the extra punch from the missiles into an already wounded SuperHeavy *can* be a knockout blow. Or it can be a waste of points.

I have no problem with a "loiter" option for cruise missiles, after all, current ones can do it. What I really want is a RPV-like vehicle that can be set to loiter in a given area and nail anything that comes by with DFMs. Current gunships can do that, but the requirement to have 2 in a flight makes it expensive, I am talking about a support option that would probably cost as much as a MOAB, but occupy a 'support' slot and NOT a 'section' slot. To keep it fair it would have to have only 1 or 2 shots at most, but still I would invest points in something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have actually used a 'layered' attack with cruise missiles, launching them one turn, and using the recon rule to bury the missiles card in the second turn that way I had a chance to maneuver an air unit into position to attack the same enemy.

 

*The Recon rule that allows an initiative card of yours to be 'buried' is during the Deployment Phase, not the game. Ritterlich's Factional Doctrine "Hunter's Edge" would allow a card to be 'buried' during the game.*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cruise Missiles worked like gangbusters in the game today - both for me and for my opponent ::(:. Here is the thing - it still seems a bit goofy to have as much control over them as we do. It also seems like strikes ar a gamble in that waiting to later in the game to call them is good (more chance of using them to take out a wounded CAV), but you run the risk of your FIST models being killed before you have the chance. Therefore, it seems that it is probably a god idea to call in cruise missiles early on and then have them hang out behind a building (or an overpass), or disguised like simple fisher folk. The problem, of course, is that this seems goofy.

 

My opponent (SGT. Crunch) and I were talking about it, and it seemed like to modifications might fix this goofy factor and some others that seemed to come up (my Cruise missile 1/8 inch away from a target that dies from return fire, so it u-turned and went after another target, for example). What if:

 

1) The FIST model who called in the strike had to name a target, to whom it had to have good LOS, and

2) every round on the table, the Cruise Missile had to end closer to this target than it started (but could go slower, take a circuitous route, etc.), and that

3) changing this target once the missile was in the air would be another specialty action

 

My feeling is that this has come up before - any thoughts on why this would/would not work?

 

-FH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like them as is. I would not change anything. Simple to use, and that is what is important.

 

These are advanced AI systems - the ones that can do automatic defense fire, without disrupting forward movement. I think there would be computing power for the missile to make small, on board game decisions as to target priority.

 

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a fluff standpoint, these are not unguided or computer-guided missiles. There's an actual person, sitting in the launcher truck controlling the missile, so changing targets is really not that big of a deal.

 

From a rules standpoint, like every other rule in CAV, you have to declare what the missile is going to do, before you resolve it. That means you can't just say "I'm moving my missile over that-a-way" and then measure the distance to 4 different models to see which ones are in your actual range. You have to declare specifically, like "My missile is going to use both of its Movement Actions to get into base-to-base with that Dictator".

 

From a game play standpoint, if you guys had a couple of missiles just hanging out on the table, you didn't bring enough Fire Support models. :poke:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully agree chrome....

 

when i send a cm downrange I make sure I have a target in my sights.... at all possible i try to get it there in the same turn I deploy it because while these missiles have computers on them and such, just having them loiter around is a good way to get them blown out of the sky.... :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the Conqueror section got wiped out because bad rolls didn't kill the Mech Inf section. I'll be posting a batrep, tonight hopefully, on my blog.

 

As far as ad hoc target selection goes I think it's a matter of do the rules determine the fluff or the fluff determine the rules? The cruise missiles were moved in a manner of declare then move with specific action declarations. It was a matter of the missile was just short of it's intended target CAV. The target CAV then activated, attacks and was subsequent destroyed by defensive fire. So the cruise then did a u-turn in the next turn.

 

What I'd like to see is that the missile needs to use its full movement. If not that then it has to end its activation closer to a target (any target) than it started.

 

And no, there were not nearly enough FIST models on the table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...