Override?

[Leech]

The FAQ (least the version I read) states that TL alone doesn't trigger defensive fire, hence the 'spotter' doesn't attract defensive fire but the firing platform does.

 

The way I look at it is this:

The computer doesn't know an offensive round from a defensive round, and it doesn't know a friendly round from a hostile round. So when the computer detects a TL attempt, it triggers the algorithm which takes control of the CAV and fires rounds down the aspect bearing of the incoming rounds.

 

Without this 'trigger' the algorithm doesn't respond to enemy fire, other than tracking it. Hence defensive fire doesn't trigger defensive fire, because when the computer throws slugs down the aspect bearing there is no TL attempt.....

 

Otherwise, CAV would be hypervelocity ping pong :o)

[Darth Bob]

Is that the current FAQ from the Downloads section of CAVHQ? But there is still a Target Lock attempt though. It only replaces step (a) which is under TL attempt.

 

Also I don't think this *changes* TL, it's an option (either normal or override). Frankly I'd rather take a TL+WSO+Mod (3+1+0=+4) roll over a Pilot+Mod (1+0=+1) roll any day. The defendier *is* rolling ECM+WSO (3+1=+4) after all to defeat that lock. Er, that's the way we did it.

 

My question is, is the Pilot roll to establish Target Lock? I think it is since it's step (a). If so, since the TL computer is overridden, do you add TL to the damage roll? Since it says "override the TL computer" then you would not add TL to the damage roll? Or would you since it says it only replaces step (a)? The pilot establishes a lock. However since you would only override when there's a negative to TL, I think you ignore TL completely. So even after lining up the shot as just the pilot... you're still rolling only the weapon damage.

 

If that's the case then you've got a "target lock attempt followed by shooting," it's just that the pilot is lining up the shot and firing. Like a modern day fighter craft like the Mirage, the other computer would register a lock attempt is being made.

 

It's like a backup system, going back to the "old school" HUD+Pilot method of lining up shots... before the invention of the fancy-pants WSO system.

 

Be that as it may, it's still not a great shot. Even with Aces.

Pilot + Mod (3+0 = 3) that's the same as a normal crew with any ECM system. I would rather take the WSO+TL+Mod roll if I could, but if I'm in a Rhino, Scorpion, or Lance Tank nearly dead... gimme Pilot+Mod because I don't want that -1 TL.

 

Urk... should have kept Lurker mode on. This is addictive.

 

EDIT: So I guess where I want clarifications from Reaper is.

1) If I get lock with the Pilot do I still add TL to the damage roll?

2) If not, what is the penalty for not getting lock?

3) Is it actually Defense roll modifiers or a typo?

[Chrome]

Target Lock is the act of the Wizzo helping the targetting system acheive a better lock on its target.  If the TL system is shut down or bypassed (what happens in this rule) there can't very well be a target lock.

 

The rule is intended to be used by skipping the TL roll and just rolling for damage as normal, with the Pilot's skill level added in.

[Froggy the Great]

Well, we could either invent a pseudoscientific reason that the defender would fire back, or we could let it slide, and put it under "Ease Of Game Play".  I'm inclined to do the latter.

[nadinbrzezinski]

Me too, as is until that BECOMES a core rule... I read this as just a proposal... anyway (one that I like by the way), then we can chuck it to house rule.

 

Now one small note... some modern fighters (and not so modern, the A-6 Intruder comes to mind as well as the F-18 Hornet) DO HAVE weapons officers, also called RIOs... their job is very similar to that of the WSO in CAV... if not the same. Moroever some CAVs have a single pilot and no WSO... or at least can per fluff. (Puma iirc in the fluff in the main rule book... cut me some slack, has been a long succesful demo day... woohoo!)

 

Nadin

[Leech]

On a technical note, a RIO and a WSO are two different jobs.... similar in form but not function.

 

Hell, I'm just saying it interfers with the fluff of how TL works. I'll give this a go and see if people like it, but to be honest I don't think the negative TL modifiers is that unrealistic.... it's possible for a computer to be damaged and not realise it has become very far off calibration.

 

I don't see this as an issue personally,  but I'll as my friends what they think.

[Akela]

Yes anything under "Proving Grounds" on the website is by no stretch of the imagination set-in-stone. They are there for playtest and feedback.

 

Also, due to this thread and a couple of quick games we were able to get in over the weekend there are changes to the rule. Please go read the update, dated today.

[Froggy the Great]

So it is as follows then?

 

Attacker rolls D10+Ps+situational mods

Defender rolls D10+ECM+WSO

 

Defender => Attacker, the shot misses

Attacker > Defender, shoot a basically un-targetlocked shot.

 

Yes?

[Akela]

In the current incarnation (10/21/02) yes that is correct.

 

It is the hit/miss on the TL (step 2 on the site) aspect where I am wanting more feedback. If that is too severe, then I want to know what is more reasonable. What I do not want is "just take the shot and skip TL."

[Froggy the Great]

Without playing it yet, I think what you have here is pretty good.  I'll see if anyone wants to try it on Saturday.

[Chrome]

One thing that may want to consider is a -1 modifier to ARM for the remainder of the turn. †It only makes sense that if the pilot is concentrating on firing the guns that he won't be able to dodge incoming rounds as well.

 

Also, would it be true then that if the player does not decide to use the override rule that his Wizzo *has* to use the TL system to fire his weapons and thus suffers the -X TL modifier?

 

Also also, if the Wizzo suceeds to get a TL with the damaged system, does the negative modifier have to be carried over to the damage resolution roll?

[Akela]

Right. Weapon's Officers have only rudimentary ability to directly control the direction that the guns/missiles point (backup piloting systems, manual controls, etc.).

 

Unlike the pilot (who controls the vehicle and who can "line up shots") the WSO shoots by using the software and directing the gun systems towards the targets quickly and smoothly (i.e. within the game turn). Thus if the TL computer is messed up, then it's still messed up when it attains lock (like with Rhino, Ogre, Scorpion, Lance, Wyvern).

 

After reading over the thread (and emails) again over the course of today... I suppose I am not as opposed to "just skipping TL" as I was before. It depends entirely on which I hate more; "rules-creep" or "just allowing that whole step to be skipped." The jury is still out.

 

Feedback, as always, desired.

 

ps - Why can't there be this kind of feedback on Full Speed? It was changed on the 15th and is up there too.  

[Gobbo]

ps - Why can't there be this kind of feedback on Full Speed? It was changed on the 15th and is up there too. †

Cause it is listed under the Scenario only section and we are only [for the most part] interested in stuff we can expect to be core rules additions and changes!?!?!   :p

[Black Lightning 2]

Wait a Minute...

 

OK, I just read the new rule again, and I'm just as confused as when it first came out.

 

Instead of rolling for TL normally (d10+WSO+TL Situation Modifiers), I can override (d10+Pilot+Direct Fire Situation Modifiers + TL Situation Modifiers).

That means if I am within 12" of a target, I can actually get a /BETTER/ score than if I chose to go with a regulr TL ('cause I get the additional +1 because of my direct fire situation mods).

 

Also, if I'm the attacker, I override and I'm successful...  I get Target Lock???  Huh?

If it's a negative number (which is the reason for this rule in the first place, right?), why would I even want anything to do with target lock?

I would really want to fail my TL so my guns fire normally.

 

I dunno, guys and gals.  This isn't a very good rule.  It's confusing and it really doesn't make the game any better.

It definitely shouldn't be a core rule thing.  It'd be next to impossible to explain this rule to a new player, because I'm an AO and I have no clue how this rule goes.

 

I say we scratch it.

[Chrome]

That means if I am within 12" of a target, I can actually get a /BETTER/ score than if I chose to go with a regulr TL ('cause I get the additional +1 because of my direct fire situation mods).

I didn't notice that yesterday... I'd say drop the TL modifiers and just use the DF mods.  After all, as I'll explain next, he isn't really getting TL in the common sense.

 

If it's a negative number (which is the reason for this rule in the first place, right?), why would I even want anything to do with target lock?

You only get TL per say. †Read step 3, you just add the weapon's RAV and any DF Attack Situational Mods. †So what you're really doing is rolling as if the wizzo didn't get TL.

 

Look at it this way... With the Wizzo's advanced TL system, we assume that every shot is a hit (or a near miss) an the TL roll is just to hit a more vulnerable area on the target. †You then roll to resolve damage.

 

The Pilot's rudimentary backup targeting system doesn't get a lock, it just aims the guns. †So his "TL" roll, is to see whether or not the shot even comes close to the target. †If he does manage to bracket his target, then he has to roll to see if he did any damage.