Recent content by MadDog

On the issues of the G-carrier (tank or not a tank) I suppose we could just ask the author what his intent was when he wrote the stats. Mad Dog

Looking at all this to and froing I am left wondering, What the heck are y'all in disagreement about? Can either side give the rest of us a brief summation of their point? My point of view is that the vehicle armor as listed, even of the best the TL 15 Imperium has to offer is ludicrously...

A 7.62mm LMG, which for the purposes of this exercise I will regard as a belt fed ACR. 3D, +6 AUTO No, thats a LMG. 4D6 damage. A .50 cal MG, which here we will stat as the Mercenary LMG. 4D, +6 AUTO. No, thats more like a 6D6 machinegun (~same ammo as the LAG). Skill 1, no other factors...

OK, 2 things. 1: One thing we can agree on is that some of the descriptions are a bit garbled. They'e aimed at newbs over grogs, too. And "effectively" is not the same as "is"; it is more like "one could describe it as". 2: What was the 'standard' fighting vehicle of WW2? The jeep. What is...

Well, no need to be too dogmatic about what is or isn't, anyway Woof. Mad Dog

Strawman. Armor made of straw, maybe. : ) Why assume that armour progression is linear? based upon book values, it sure as hell isnt exponential. TL6 car = 6. TL15 tank = 25. Considering the advances in armor design from book equipment (combat armor ?), it sure cant be stalled out...

And I cited the NATO definition of small arms. Which includes weapons to 50 mm caliber. On the whole if I am confronted with a choice between your personal opinion and the considered opinion of NATO's experts ... well, let's just say that your personal opinion doesn't come off well in...

So far, in our examples, we have been using the case which is looks at the effect on high-tech tanks. So what happens if we look at lower tech tanks ? The G-Carrier is a TL15, armor 25 tank ("A grav carrier is effectively a flying tank, and is the standard fighting vehicle of many military...

Since the LMG in Mercenary weighs 20kg, it's more similar to those heavy guns than an M60. The FN Minimi weighs between 6kg and 7kg, depending on the specific model. A WW2 era MG34 weighs 10kg. ...and a M2 HMG weighs some ~60 kg with tripod. The L(ight) machinegun listed in the book is far...

PTRD Anti Tank Rifle: 14.5 mm capable of penetrating 25 mm of armour at 300 meters (1941/42). .55", Boys Anti-Tank Rifle. Mark 1, Mark 1*, Mark 2 which probably had similar performance (c. 14 mm round). Lahti L-39 Anti-Tank Rifle: 20 mm etc Phil, I am completely aware of the varieties of...

The other APCs/IFVs mentioned are also only resistant to the heavier caliber rounds mentioned on the front ... and as vulnerable to smallarms fire on the sides and rear (and hull top and bottom) as all APCs are ... making them anything but "immune". Immune to having armor or structure being...

Actually, no. The purpose of an APC's armour is not now nor has it ever been (well, except for those Israeli tank/apc conversions) to "make it immune to smallarms". Indeed, in some cases, I should more carefully consider before posting. Allow me to rephrase: "the purpose of the APC armor is...

With Gauss Rifles, the difference is more dramatic: they hit and penetrate the AFV 18 times for 25 hits, destroying the last Structure point with the final round (thus destroying it in a ball of flames). Versus the Gcarrier they penetrate twice for 2 hits. (How did half-tracks fare against...

Eh? The answer is: It can't. Neither can the 4d6 LMG. Unless there's some special rule that makes 24 more than 25. Arent you forgetting the effect ? Add in the size modifier, the autofire, your chances to affect armor 25 (much less "18") are > 0. Mad Dog: Did you not just demonstrate a 8%...

My own way probably would be to put small arms, vehicle weapons and starship weapons into three different "scales" A lot of starship weapons would fit into a vehicle. Sure, a spinal mount is right out, but a missle launcher or laser should fit into a vehicle easily. Mad Dog