Armor Factors

[phavoc]

I did some Google work.

No comment on the accuracy, because who knows, people sometimes lie ... err, engage in information warfare.

But you want (this link) and from there (this powerpoint) which claims to be "U.S. ARMY TACOM June 2003 -- This briefing captures some of the key equipment performance issues and lessons learned as interpreted by PM Abram's personnel deployed forward with the Divisions during Operation Iraqi Freedom"

There's some photos of broken tanks with holes in, and words about how they supposedly got broke. Reading it, it says "Externally stored items highly vulnerable to small arms fire. In some cases catastrophic losses resulted from burning EAPU materiel and/or packaged POL products dripping down into the engine compartment. Many cases where TA-50 lost ... snip ... Lesson learned: Review and stick to established load plans"

I never liked plotted movement in SFB as I enjoyed the reactive nature of the movement, and energy allocation was all the plotting I needed. However I would a love a working 3d board and counters. Attack Vector got it working but they used newtonian drive, not reactionless, so you had inertia.

Hrm... POL getting into engine compartment and gunking up/starting fires I can see disabling the engine. But I am completely unaware of how any TA-50 gear could ever punch a hole in the side of a turret or any part of the tank body. TA-50 is your gear - shelter half, sleeping bag, uniforms, etc. It's supposed to be stored internally, but carrying it outside means more room inside. Nothing that I'm aware of carried externally has the ability to detonate, let alone penetrate hull armor.

I did find a Jane's article from more recent, where Iraqi army was given refurbished M1's and they were taking damage from RPG and light ATGM - but they also did NOT have the upgraded depleted uranium armor plate that US tanks have.

Oh, I hate plotted movement. It sucks. Much prefer turn-based movement (hey, a reason for a tactics skill roll!). Pre-plotting sucks, though it's more 'realistic'. Still sucks.

3D movement is interesting concept. How much record keeping does it handle? And movement vectors would make things messy if you had newtonian movement. Turn rates make a difference, as would weapon firing arcs. That's not too bad to do on a movement board.

 

[Anonymous]

They make a 3d traveller space combat boardgame with newtonian thrust.

http://www.adastragames.com/products/squadron-strike-traveller-deluxe

Re how much paperwork it is: more than Warhammer, less than Star Fleet Battles fleet combat or Pathfinder character minmaxing.

edit: A caveat - I played the original when it was called Delta-V. I understand Attack Vector to be basically the same (DV 1.1 so to speak), and Squadron Strike to be a "generic" Attack Vector i.e. without DV/AV's lore and empires. But I have only played DV.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

They make a 3d traveller space combat boardgame with newtonian thrust.

How do they visualise the map?

Without good visualisation we can just use a spreadsheet?

 

[Anonymous]

They make a 3d traveller space combat boardgame with newtonian thrust.

How do they visualise the map?

Without good visualisation we can just use a spreadsheet?

Delta-v is a tabletop game, so they used a hex map with counters. Shp counters were rectangular boxes with art on all 6 sides. In addition to being able to face adjacent hexagons a ship could have pitch (climb/dive) indicated by placing a cardboard stand under the ship that angled the counter appropriately. Altitude was shown by placing tiles under the counter.

Facing and velocity were independent of each other, and you used a lookup table to resolve the mathematics of thrust, heading changes, 3d firing arcs, and which of the (I think 20) target facings a ship has. I remember it being 6 regular 2d facings, 6 the same from above, 6 the same from below and finally 1 each directly overhead and directly under.

 

[steve98052]

Battery fire

I would say that battery fire should be selectable for various spreads:

- Broad spread (a grid about one ship width spacing), maximum chance to hit, but only one hit possible

- Moderate spread (a grid that spans one ship width total), some improvement in chance to hit, variable number of hits, each hit rolls its own hit location, none hit the same spot within a hit location

- Narrow spread (a grid that spans a single hit location), small improvement to hit, no more than two adjacent hit location hit (and "miss" is adjacent to edge locations), none hit the same location within a hit location

- Point aim (all shots aimed at the exact same spot, to the limits of equipment collimation), all shots hit the same hit location, some chance of hitting the same spot for better penetration, same chance to hit as a single shot

- Independent fire, treat each weapon as an independent shot

3D play

Two ships have only range.

Three ships can always be plotted on a flat surface.

Four or more ships can require actual 3D tracking, which is a hassle.