the PLA AA system...

[Paladin]

But surely you must conceed that its gonna be more affective against an airbourne target then an M-16 or an AK-47?

Sure, but is the guided round going to be that much more effective than a standard shell when fired at short range?

 

[Larac]

Well if you Hit with the 99 I think it has a much better chance of killing than an AK, so it is more effective.


I hope that if the dollar does a turn around in the next year Mongoose might be able to lower the prices some, but for what it looks like we will get for the money it is really a decent deal.

Lee

 

[tneva82]

Poko...if the Type99 were realistically resesented in this game...that would be enough AA capability for me...and I would not have to spend $25 on another model...

Once your army has been destroyed couple of times by airforces as your half-adequate Type99 tries desperatly to do something it isn't designed for(there's REASON why dedicated AA units exists in real world...If Type99 would be sufficiently good there wouldn't be NEED of dedicated AA units!!!).

But hey. You don't want to buy model just stick coke bottle to the table for it. Not like Mongoose is going to stop you.

 

[DM]

If Type99 would be sufficiently good there wouldn't be NEED of dedicated AA units!!!).

True, and the fact that the PLA fields dedicated AA units is proof of this. However, if there are more widespread AA assets on the battlefield, even if they have a more limited capability, they make the battlefield a far more dangerous place for enemy attack and observation helicopters.

 

[Poko]

but that leads to one problem. if the AA ammo was standard rule for the T-99, then it would be too expensive against oponnets with no air assets.if it wasn't priced accordingly, then it would lead to (slight,but still)unfair advantage against air units.

 

[DM]

Price it as an optional extra?

 

[Poko]

duh, well,yeah ,forgot that the cards ARE the army list entry,not just it's representative :lol:

 

[Lorcan Nagle]

But surely you must conceed that its gonna be more affective against an airbourne target then an M-16 or an AK-47?

That'd be the part where it's still rolling D10+whatever instead of D6.

 

[Iain McGhee]

The only AA tank ammo I know of was a proximity round intended for the M1A2 which as far as I know never got beyond a prototype. Even then it was only intended to be used on slow-moving helicopters. I'd be surprised if any MBT could turn it's turret fast enough to engage even an A10-type plane with it's main gun never mind the likes of a JSF or Typhoon. Cannon armed IFVs have some limited capacity against aircraft, but again they have to be fairly low and slow to be engaged. If someone doesn't want to buy an AA vehicle I'm pretty sure that MANPADS teams will be on the cards for future release, or at least the possibility of some forces being able to pay points for them as an option for infantry squads.

 

[DM]

I've just receibved an email from a friend in the FSU who is well versed in the ways and equipments of the Russiansd and their chums. He has confirmed the capability of the 125mm gun launched missiles against manoeuvring helicopters and agrees that, whilst one might get lucky against a strike aircraft, they are definitely not part of the required target set.

 

[Iain McGhee]

I'd forgotten about that. Given that the Warsaw Pact often shot my Cobras down that way (1/300 microarmour using Combat Commander rules 18 years ago) using AT9s and the like I've probably hidden that memory away in the compartment of my brain marked "Great Wargaming Disasters". At the rate those accumulate I'll soon not have room for anything else :shock: