Fixing CAV2 (Indirect Attacks)

[Sergeant_Crunch]

Evilmonkey and I got together this weekend to playtest some ideas I've had for fixing the huddle and streamlining Indirect Fire. The full report and discussion of what we did is here...

http://scsminimadness.blogspot.com/2012/11/fixing-cav.html

 

Long story short: we still need to work on fixing the huddle, but we've found a solution we like for streamlining IA:

1. Calculate target number
   
   1. 
      
   2. Add TC of firing model, FRS/# value, and Target Lock bonus
      
   3. Subtract 2 for each range band beyond the first
      
   4. Subtract Jamming penalty
      

[*] roll 1d10

1. If result is equal to or less than the target number calculated in Step 1, the attack hits the Target Point
   
2. If the result is greater than the target number calculated in Step 1, the drift distance is equal to the die roll minus the target number in the direction indicated by the tip of the d10
   

Damage is rolled using the RAV and appropriate SAs against the DV of models in the AoE.

 

The effects of the CFP and Salvo Barrage fire are unchanged.

 

Feel free to try it out and post your results in this thread. Please keep in mind that this is for CAV2 only.

[papabees]

Hmm. Simple, but as I play out scenarios in my mind it would seem to be effective.

 

I still think to fix the huddle you require the target model to be in the AOE of the model with ECM or ECCM to get the bonus rather than the friendly model.

[battlegnome]

It makes sense that the closer to the source of jamming the harder it is to burn through it. However, it would still have effectiveness at range. Give ECM and EST a generic profile like a weapon for each Level, indicating its effectiveness at various range bands against the firing model or target.

 

Or, give a free action that allows a roll to negate or reduce the effectiveness of ECM/EST.

 

Example 1: A Dictator '60 is firing at a Starhawk V. The Starhawk is under a value 3 ECM bubble. The Dictator gets a free action to burn through the ECM using its TC.

 

Example 2: A Dictator '60 us firing at a Starhawk V. The Dictator benefits from a value 2 EST bubble. The Starhawk V gets a free action to jam the effectiveness of the EST using its EDV (from RC '08)

 

If each side benefits from a bubble, than no roll is required as there is too much interference, a standard targeting computer or ECM package is overridden by the better data being provided from outside the vehicle.

 

I suppose if you just made the rolls an opposed D10 roll using the ECM vs TC and EST vs EDV that might work.

 

* This could result in way too much die rolling.....*

 

Also, I think that this wouldn't apply to Defensive fire.

[papabees]

It makes sense that the closer to the source of jamming the harder it is to burn through it. However, it would still have effectiveness at range. Give ECM and EST a generic profile like a weapon for each Level, indicating its effectiveness at various range bands against the firing model or target.

 

Or, give a free action that allows a roll to negate or reduce the effectiveness of ECM/EST.

 

Example 1: A Dictator '60 is firing at a Starhawk V. The Starhawk is under a value 3 ECM bubble. The Dictator gets a free action to burn through the ECM using its TC.

 

Example 2: A Dictator '60 us firing at a Starhawk V. The Dictator benefits from a value 2 EST bubble. The Starhawk V gets a free action to jam the effectiveness of the EST using its EDV (from RC '08)

 

If each side benefits from a bubble, than no roll is required as there is too much interference, a standard targeting computer or ECM package is overridden by the better data being provided from outside the vehicle.

 

I suppose if you just made the rolls an opposed D10 roll using the ECM vs TC and EST vs EDV that might work.

 

* This could result in way too much die rolling.....*

 

Also, I think that this wouldn't apply to Defensive fire.

 

This doesn't address the issue though. The reason people huddle is to be close to the ECM, ECCM benefit. If it is stronger closer to the equipped model people will still huddle. That is the problem. Eliminate the need to be close and you eliminate the huddle.

[Sergeant_Crunch]

Guys, stay on topic please. This thread is for IA. When we've worked out how we want to handle EW, we'll start a different thread. It's not that I don't value your input, but I don't want the discussions to get spread out over several threads.

 

And for Lord's sake stop saying that the huddle needs to be fixed. It's been a known issue since 2007. Either stop griping about it or implement your own solution because Reaper isn't going to. That's what we're doing and we'll share it and our observations.

[papabees]

Works for me. I'll see if I can give these a playtest.

[Mad Pat]

Another option that was discussed was a non guided shot. This would be the most viable shot for units where IA is a secondary weapon like the Dictator.

 

1. Pick a point in space on the board with in range.

2. Strait up Exp stat roll vs 10 minus range band modifiers, so EXP of 5 in the second band would be a 3 + d10 vs 10.

3. Beat the 10 round lands at the designated spot, continue on to normal damage procedures, if you miss roll for unmodified drift.

 

This is a completly unaided shot, no TC, no FRS no nothing, just take your cursur pick a spot on the map and hope something is there when it lands. Because you aren't using any electronic aids for shooting you are also not restricted by electronic counter measures. In the small group of testing that I did this was a really nice option for the small IA packs on the initial turns of the game to help soften targets up on the way in. It also works because ammo is free might as well fire it.

[battlegnome]

Sorry to stray off topic. I guess I have never fielded forces that required too much in the way of IA. Streamling anything sounds good to me. Also, I haven't really dealt with the huddle, my regular opponent plays Templars and pimps out his rides with ECM/2 on everybody!

[Sergeant_Crunch]

No worries, just trying to deal with one thing at a time.

[Watchman]

Just a note for anyone interested. In real life when closing on an ECM source, there is a point when the ECM is so strong it becomes a target to lock on.

[Sergeant_Crunch]

Just a note for anyone interested. In real life when closing on an ECM source, there is a point when the ECM is so strong it becomes a target to lock on.

Which with the distances involved on the usual game table is the table. It's that tricky issue of getting close to modelling reality without letting the mechanics bog down the game or otherwise upset game balance. At one point though, probably when one of the RAGE Chronicles was being written, I proposed the idea of having the CAV version of anti-radiation missiles that used the EDV as a positive modifier to the attack. The idea never picked up steam though as I remember.

[sethohman]

Didn't post in here before, but MIL-NET was working on a solution. LEt me see if I can dig out what we came up with over there. We had changed and playtested a few updates to the game, that really seemed to work.

 

My kids game now, so this could give me the perfect excuse to pull out CAV again.....

[Outkast Samurai]

I like the streamline of it and it played out nice and smooth. It brings things around back to the basics and keeps the number of steps easy to work with. I was playing with a nice section of Outlaws and it allowed a nice quick peppering of the enemy.

[Watchman]

In response to Sgt Crunch, I should have qualified my statement by saying it would be necessary to use actual n-sacle distances and when you close to around say 396" then you could start to lock on to the ECM signal itself. So for game purposes at table scales ECM would be ineffective for the generator, everyone else would be protected until he was removed.

[Chrome]

 

Just a note for anyone interested. In real life when closing on an ECM source, there is a point when the ECM is so strong it becomes a target to lock on.

Which with the distances involved on the usual game table is the table. It's that tricky issue of getting close to modelling reality without letting the mechanics bog down the game or otherwise upset game balance. At one point though, probably when one of the RAGE Chronicles was being written, I proposed the idea of having the CAV version of anti-radiation missiles that used the EDV as a positive modifier to the attack. The idea never picked up steam though as I remember.

 

This was something similar, but limited to Gunships only. http://mil-net.net/111008_OptRulesNov.cfm