Override?

[KaiMaster]

Mike:  I agree with the rule being overly complex.  Being an AO as well, this rule breaks my demos.  I could live with the "defensive fire to a CAV with LoS when shooting IF at you" but this one makes it way too clunky  hehe

 

How I always thought it worked (and how I logically explain combat and defensive fire in demos, new players don't accept "death blossom mode" right away) was the attacker tries to get tone (TL).  If so, the computers help take the shot.  If not, the CAV "eyeballs" the target and shoots without computer help.  The numbers on the guns include the ability of the CAV and pilot to help aim it.  

 

Defensive fire is easy to explain: the CAV detects incoming fire and it selects a trajectory (target) to return fire at.  It returns fire and then disappears in a plume of black smoke heh

 

A "house rule" I use simply allows the player to turn off TL at will.  In 2271, there is GPS which is fluff to allow premeasuring, and thus in 2271 CAV pilots and wizzos have the inherent ability to turn the targetting computer on and off   :D

[KaiMaster]

Or does that damned Rhino develop a "HAL-9000 complex" at 8 damage tracks...

 

"I'm sorry Dave, but I am afraid I can't let you do that" when you try to shut the computer off.  Maybe at 8DTs on the Rhino the power button fails to work.  lol

 

Great idea to have negative modifiers on the guns... it doesn't work for the targetting computer.  ECM is fine having negative numbers, meaning if you turn it off the enemy automatically locks you.   :p

[Black Lightning 2]

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.

If that's the case, then, what's the point?

 

You mean to tell me I've gotta go through all that song and dance just to bring me back to where I'd be if I simply failed my TL?

 

Heck with that...

Just take the what TL gives you.  Roll.  And, if you fail, fine, fire your guns normally.

If you've got a positive number in your TL, you'll want that anyway.  If, for any reason, you get a better bonus through override than you do through a positive TL number...  Then this rule just broke the system (because players will go around TL and try to get a better advantage through override (which can be a negative play experience for others)).

If you have a negative TL number...  Then, chances are you'll fail your TL anyway and fire your guns normally.

 

It just seems like a whole lot more math for something that doesn't really do anything.

 

Kai is right.  If the piece of equipment is busted...  Try to fix it.  If you can't fix it, turn it off before it kills you.

Except for ECM.  I think negative numbers for a CAVs ECM also conceptually means the higher EM signature a CAV makes when it is damaged...  Damaged machines don't run as effectively anymore and are easier to hit (heck, just aim for the smoking plume! ).

[bent brush]

Gonna be long.

 

>Override (10/21/2002)

> † The controlling player may opt to Override the Target Lock computers during the model's activation to declare an Override >Direct Fire Activity. This represents situations becoming so grim that the Pilot takes control of the firing systems from the >Weapons Officer to take a manual shot at the target using a backup targeting system.

 

† †Perhaps I have a different view of pilots and gunners.

 

† †The pilot keeps the CAV form falling down, running in to stuff and from being horribly damaged when shot at. Much like a driver in an automobile might in a drive by shooting. †And like said driver their entire attention is focussed on the task at hand.

 

† †The Gunner selects the best target locations on a silhouette presented by the Targeting Computer. †The gunner has full control of the weapon systems and the appropriate skills with which to use them. Their entire attention is trained on picking the most vulnerable sections of the targets available. Again using the Drive by †example, is the guy that is using what ever weapons he has in his hand or mounted on the side of the car. †

 

> For Direct Fire Resolution (only) the player may add the Pilot Skill + Direct Fire Attack Situation Modifiers + any Target Lock >modifiers and enhancements (such as friendly ECCM pods) to a d10 roll. When in Override mode, this replaces the normal >method for Step One: Target Lock (a) when conducting Direct Fire Attacks. (CAV Main rulebook page 92)

 

† Simple EnglishÖ the pilot now controls the weapon systems of severely damaged CAV. Back to the Drive By example: the gunner is incapacitated and now the car is the weapon under the control of the pilot. It is up to the pilot to maneuver the car to allow the now uncontrolled weapon systems to be effective. †

 

ECCM should not be an option in this instance. The Pilot has to make from the hip decisions and all electronic assistance can be considered undependable or distracting.

 

>The two modified die rolls are compared. If the attacker's modified die roll is higher than the defender's modified die roll the >attacker has successfully locked on to the target. If the defender's modified die roll is equal to or higher than the attacker's >modified die roll the defender has successfully prevented a Target Lock, the attack automatically misses and the Direct Fire >activity ends. When in Override mode, this replaces the normal method for Step One: Target Lock © when conducting Direct >Fire Attacks. (CAV Main rulebook page 92)

 

Target Lock should not be available as the Computer system is undependable and the CAV Pilot is ìEye Ballingî where to hit.

 

This should be called ìFrom the hipî or something less technical than Target lock. It is essentially a ìfrom the Hipî roll.

 

>If Target Lock is achieved, the attacker chooses the first weapon he wishes to fire and adds the Attack Value of the weapon >and any Direct Fire Attack Situation Modifiers to a 1d10 roll. When in Override mode, this replaces the normal method for >Step Two: Attack Resolution (d) when conducting Direct Fire Attacks (CAV Main rulebook page 92).

>The Defender conducts Defensive Fire as normal.

 

I think that all that should be allowed is the full usage of the weapons current value. The pilot has not the time to make delicate adjustments to get ìjust the right shotî.

 

 

In short , ëbout time eh, the pilot should be allowed to ìEye Ballî the shot and either hit or miss. No damage bonus, for hitting, no damage negative for using the Computer.

 

Simple and sweet, hit or miss.

 

So it should be

To hit:

 

Pilot skill + Range modifiers + Die roll. ñVS- Usual defense algorithm. To ìEye Ballî Hit.

 

To Damage

 

Weapon bonus + range modifier ñVS- Usual defense algorithm. To ìEye Ballî Damage.

 

But this comes back to my very first post .

 

I do not care for this rule, too cumbersome.

 

If it were made a rule at all it should be a Scenario rule.

[Chrome]

Anyone got their rulebook handy?  If so, check the page in the rules about modifying systems.  I know that a model w/o an ECM system can't evade TL, what does it say about a model w/o TL?  Can it not Target Lock anyone or can it not fire its weapons all together?

 

I'm beginning to think that this rule is a bad idea too.  Personally, I always favored the player having to use the negative number, since its part of the CAV he selected and already calculated into the model's point value.

[nadinbrzezinski]

I agree with you. I do not like this optional rule either, and DF in my view is more the computer "shooting from the hip" at the center of mass than anything else as well. Also you CAN fire even when not acquiring the target... so why override the system?

 

The only place I can see this rule is in a scenario where the CAV has a single crewman either due to injury of the WSO or because the pilot just took off on his or her own.

 

Nadin

[wolf]

It would seem BB has put some good size holes in this one, very accurately too. †

 

From first reading this one, I wasn't to thrilled with the idea, but even less after this. †

 

It could make an interesting scenerio rule, but I doubt much else.

 

I've got to give credit though, it is an interesting idea, but one we need to work through some more.

[bent brush]

Thanks for the kind words.

 

I try.

[Leech]

As I said, I agree in principle, but I think it should be a scenario rule... and I don't see why we can't just ignore the entire TL vs ECM roll altogether.

 

Matt, could you explain some of your thinking here... perhaps if we knew what you were aiming for we could help :o)

[Gobbo]

The more I read here, and the more I think about this rule, the less I like it.  I do agree it is a feasable idea, but not a real exacutable one.

[Froggy the Great]

Something you could do is allow the pilot to take control and fire, but make him take a supression test (surpression test = pilot skill test) to fire first.

[Akela]

The concept was born of the basic question "What happens when the computer fails, who shoots?" The answer was that the gun systems go to neutral and the pilot uses manual systems (like a HUD).

 

I'm wondering if it shouldn't just be reduced to a FAQ.

 

**** example not official yet ****

Q) May a model with a negative modifier to TL due to damage ignore the Step One: Target Lock phase of Direct Fire Attack Resolution and go directly to Step Two: Attack Resolution (aka "the damage roll"). Can this be done with Indirect Fire?

A) Direct Fire, yes. In situations like this the Pilot assumes manual control of the weapon systems to fire. Indirect Fire, no.

**** example not official yet ****

 

That may just be way easier, still be a "core rule" and not add anything. Give feedback and I'll ponder it over the weekend.

[Chrome]

That works for me.  Just add in a -1 mod for everything that the pilot does to represent him having to split time between shooting and driving.

 

Also, it'd be a good rule for scenarios where one crew member is dead and the other guy has to do both jobs.

[Leech]

I agree with you completely there Chrome. And that wording is much better. That I'd use....

 

Especially the -1 to piloting checks etc.... including damage I assume.

[Froggy the Great]

**** example not official yet ****

Q) May a model with a negative modifier to TL due to damage ignore the Step One: Target Lock phase of Direct Fire Attack Resolution and go directly to Step Two: Attack Resolution (aka "the damage roll"). Can this be done with Indirect Fire?

A) Direct Fire, yes. In situations like this the Pilot assumes manual control of the weapon systems to fire. Indirect Fire, no.

**** example not official yet ****

This example is a good start, but way too vaguely worded.

I'd want what is actually rolled when, with what modifiers.