MgT2E Anti Vehicle Damage

[rgrove0172]

MgT2E - Just browsing the various weapons systems it doesnt appear anything other than the largest planet buster has a chance to take out a decent military vehicle without hitting it several times and rolling really well on damage. Am I missing something.

TAC missile does 8D damage so an average of 28 or so. Even with its AP10 its got to cut through 90 or so HULL for an APC.

IM working out some shoulder launched RPG type weapons and the like and trying to fit them in but unless your shooting at a bike or ground car or something the weapon examples listed in either the core book or Central Supply Catalog seem pretty unimpressive v.s. hard targets.

Anyone notice this?

 

[Brandon C]

The problem isn't the weapon, it's the armor. A Traveller TL 14 heavy grav tank has max armor of 86. The vehicles in 2300AD rules are probably double what they should be.

 

[kilemall]

This is 2300, an entirely different system. Probably want to stick to the Mongoose section for specifics.

 

[Brandon C]

This is 2300, an entirely different system. Probably want to stick to the Mongoose section for specifics.

The man-portable antitank missiles in M2300 are not effective vs either hovertank in the core book, but they can damage the Kangaroo APC and the scout car.

 

[Brandon C]

MgT2E - Just browsing the various weapons systems it doesnt appear anything other than the largest planet buster has a chance to take out a decent military vehicle without hitting it several times and rolling really well on damage. Am I missing something.

Okay, after looking through my books, I have a few comments, some of which I have already mentioned. I do need to note that I have MgT 1e and Supplement 6: Military Vehicles (2300AD used the revised version of that for it's vehicle designs), so my numbers may not match what you are seeing.

(1) Armor is too high: Based on designs in S6, I think the armor of the military vehicles in 2300AD is about double of what it should be. The problem here is that there is no way to find out how much armor in S6 a given amount of armor in GDW 2300AAD is worth. Indirectly in T2300, 1 point of armor is 1 cm of hardened steel. Unfortunately, in S6, there is not even an indirect reference as to how much real world armor a point of armor represents. Therefore, conversions are mere guesswork, and for this book, wrong guesses were made. Additionally, the plenum chamber, which was poorly armored in T2300 is not even a target in M2300.

(2) MgT underestimates shaped charge penetration: This actually should vary with TL, with early HEAT rounds being Semi-AP or AP, eventually getting to at least Mega-AP or Ultimate-AP. However, possible the result of flawed simplicity, it was just set at Super-AP. While shaped charge warheads are much better at penetrating hardened steel than long rod penetrators (eg, APFSDS), it is much easier to degrade their performance with armor add-ons (such as reactive armor) while long rod penetrators can really on be further degraded by thicker armor or more advanced armor. I think S6 chose to simplify this this by ignoring all the add-ons to defeat shaped charge warheads, Unfortunately, this is done at the expense of realism.

(3) Anti-missile systems: The heavier 2300AD military vehicles mount one or two anti-missile systems, so even if your missile has the right penetration listed a single missile is highly unlikely to hit.

This isn't 1945 and your character isn't a Volksturmmann stalking a T-34/85 in the ruins of Berlin with a Panzerfaust.The odds of a lone infantryman knocking out a MBT with a man-portable missile is technically non-zero, but not by much.

 

[McPerth]

Okay, after looking through my books, I have a few comments, some of which I have already mentioned. I do need to note that I have MgT 1e and Supplement 6: Military Vehicles (2300AD used the revised version of that for it's vehicle designs), so my numbers may not match what you are seeing.

(1) Armor is too high: Based on designs in S6, I think the armor of the military vehicles in 2300AD is about double of what it should be. The problem here is that there is no way to find out how much armor in S6 a given amount of armor in GDW 2300AAD is worth. Indirectly in T2300, 1 point of armor is 1 cm of hardened steel. Unfortunately, in S6, there is not even an indirect reference as to how much real world armor a point of armor represents. Therefore, conversions are mere guesswork, and for this book, wrong guesses were made. Additionally, the plenum chamber, which was poorly armored in T2300 is not even a target in M2300.

Let me quote myself in the thread about this same issue in the MgT forum:

A German LkPzIX has armor 90-150 (depending on the zone hit), while its gun makes 16d6 mega AP. In the anti-armor ammunition section, I don't find mega AP, but super AP means it ignroes double the number of damage dice points of armor (so it would ignore 32 points of armor).

If it is so, armor would be 58 in the thinest parts of the tank, so allowing for the possibility to damage it (as 16d6 may mean up to 96).

If mega AP means even increased reduction of armor, it escalates even more...

It's true that grenade launchers are at most (HEAP) 6d6 AP (so reducing armor by 6 points), anti vehicle missiles are at most 9d6 super AP (so ignoring 18 points of armor) and Plasma guns are at máximum 14d6 (they are not markes as any AP, but I guess they should), so the tank is imprevious to them...

But this that is one of the most advanced ones, and combat walkers are armor 22, while other AFVs hav armor ranges of 24-48 (Kangaroo APC) or 70-120 (AC 8)...

(2) MgT underestimates shaped charge penetration: This actually should vary with TL, with early HEAT rounds being Semi-AP or AP, eventually getting to at least Mega-AP or Ultimate-AP. However, possible the result of flawed simplicity, it was just set at Super-AP. While shaped charge warheads are much better at penetrating hardened steel than long rod penetrators (eg, APFSDS), it is much easier to degrade their performance with armor add-ons (such as reactive armor) while long rod penetrators can really on be further degraded by thicker armor or more advanced armor. I think S6 chose to simplify this this by ignoring all the add-ons to defeat shaped charge warheads, Unfortunately, this is done at the expense of realism.

As I already told, I didn't find the mega AP meaning, but even super AP (so reducing armor by twice the dice of a weapon) may modify it quite a lot, as already explained. HEAP is shown as AP in the propelled grenades, while probably shuld be super AP (as the panzerfaust), but even then wiht 6d6 damage it could not affect heavy tanks (with is probably right), but could a Kangaroo APC or a combat Walker. I nthe case of a panzerfaust, it is 9d6 super AP, so it reduces 18 armor points, and can affect (with luck) even armor 70, so it could even damage an AC8 (the French tank), while a Kangaroo or Combat Waler could not withstand it...

Aside from any HEAP effect, what really called my attention here is that plasma guns (one of the anti armor weapons in classical 2300AD) have no AP modifier, be them portable or heavy ones (pages 154-156), while the CLP-1A, shown in page 189 as vehicular plasma weapon (nad told in page 155 to be a ligher version from the heavy one shown there) , is 8d6 Mega AP... See that if those heavy plasam guns had AP or super AP too, with their 14-16d6 would be quite lethal even against the heaviest tanks (except on front hits)...

Neither are the vehicular missiles shown as any degree of AP, despite the Giscard Manta 1 and the Luchs being described as hiperkinetic anti-vehicle missiles with speeds of match 5 and 7 respectivelly...

(3) Anti-missile systems: The heavier 2300AD military vehicles mount one or two anti-missile systems, so even if your missile has the right penetration listed a single missile is highly unlikely to hit.

This isn't 1945 and your character isn't a Volksturmmann stalking a T-34/85 in the ruins of Berlin with a Panzerfaust.The odds of a lone infantryman knocking out a MBT with a man-portable missile is technically non-zero, but not by much.

No, it's not, but a heavy wepons team can give some trouble to tanks in 2300AD too if we accept the plama weapons should be AP or super AP..

 

[Brandon C]

Armor piercing effects are described in Central Casting Catalogue 1e, pp.109-113.

FWIW, hyperkinetic rounds have Ultimate-AP penetration -- five times base damage dice

(And no, I didn't know that until this morning. CCC layout leaves a bit to be desired.)

 

[McPerth]

Armor piercing effects are described in Central Casting Catalogue 1e, pp.109-113.

FWIW, hyperkinetic rounds have Ultimate-AP penetration -- five times base damage dice

(And no, I didn't know that until this morning. CCC layout leaves a bit to be desired.)

I don't know this supplement. Is for MgT1E or for MgT2300AD?

See that this way, those vehicle missiles would both be 8d6 and reduce armor by 40, so they could affect up to 80+ armor on a lucky hit...

BTW, I just realized this thread is described in the title as MgT2E, but, AFAIK, there is not (at least yet) any MgT2E 2300AD...

 

[Brandon C]

I don't know this supplement. Is for MgT1E or for MgT2300AD?

MgT1E, but most of the stuff in in will work with MgT 2300AD.

 

[McPerth]

MgT1E, but most of the stuff in in will work with MgT 2300AD.

Yes, it is assumed to be all applicable unless otherwise said...

Would you them be so kind as to tell me what ultra AP means?

 

[Brandon C]

Yes, it is assumed to be all applicable unless otherwise said...

Would you them be so kind as to tell me what ultra AP means?

Semi-AP: x.5
AP: x1
Super AP: x2
Ultra AP: x3
Mega AP: x4
Ultimate AP: x5

 

[McPerth]

Semi-AP: x.5
AP: x1
Super AP: x2
Ultra AP: x3
Mega AP: x4
Ultimate AP: x5

Thanks.

Then, to resume, the anti-armor weapons in MgT2300AD would produce as damages:

PGMP (assuming the same Mega-AP as shown for the CLP-1A shown in page 189):

• A-9 (Germany): 8d6, reducing armor by 32, so it can reach a maximum of 80, and damage over 50% time up to armor 60.
• Type 1 (Manchuria): 10d6, reducing armor by 40, so it can reach a maximum of 100, and damage over 50% time up to armor 75.
• Type 21F (Manchuria): 12d6, reducing armor by 48, so it can reach a maximum of 120, and damage over 50% time up to armor 96.
• Mk2-A2 (France/US): 14d6, reducing armor by 56, so it can reach a maximum of 140, and damage over 50% time up to armor 105.

Heavy PG (again assuming the same Mega-AP as shown for the CLP-1A shown in page 189):

• CLP-1A (France): 16d6, reducing armor by 64, so it can reach a maximum of 160, and damage over 50% time up to armor 120.
• CLP-1A (France, export versión for light vehicles, as shown in page 189): 8d6, reducing armor by 32, so it can reach a maximum of 80, and damage over 50% time up to armor 60.
• A4T (Germany): 14d6, reducing armor by 56, so it can reach a maximum of 140, and damage over 50% time up to armor 105.
• M22 (US Plasma Bazooka): 16d6, reducing armor by 64, so it can reach a maximum of 160, and damage over 50% time up to armor 120.

(note the difference among both CLP-1A, despite sharing the name (and the vehicular one is shown as mega-AP in the book). Errata?

Propelled HEAP grenade: 6d6 AP, reducing armor by 6, so it can reach a maximum of 42, and damage over 50% time up to armor 27.

Guided ordinance:

• Antichar-14 (France): 8d6 super AP, reducing armor by 16, so it can reach a maximum of 64, and damage over 50% time up to armor 44.
• Panzerfaust (Germany): 9d6 super AP, reducing armor by 18, so it can reach a maximum of 72, and damage over 50% time up to armor 50.

Vehicle missiles (as describes as hiperkinetic, they are ultimate-AP):

• Giscard-manta 1 (France) or Luchs -c (Germany):8d6, reducing armor by 40, so it can reach a maximum of 88, and damage over 50% time up to armor 64.

Mass driver Cannons (all generic):

• 65 mm: 16d6 mega-AP, reducing armor by 64, so it can reach a maximum of 160, and damage over 50% time up to armor 120.
• 70 mm: 14d6 mega-AP, reducing armor by 56, so it can reach a maximum of 140, and damage over 50% time up to armor 105.
• 75 mm: 12d6 mega-AP, reducing armor by 48, so it can reach a maximum of 120, and damage over 50% time up to armor 90.

See tthen hat most of those weapons are quite dangerous to everything except the heaviest tanks, and the more powerful of them also for them...

 

[Brandon C]

Thanks.

Then, to resume, the anti-armor weapons in MgT2300AD would produce as damages:

PGMP (assuming the same Mega-AP as shown for the CLP-1A shown in page 189):

I don't think any of the man-portable plasma weapons have any AP effects, going by the stats of plasma Weapons in CCC (p.99) and nothing mentioned in the intro to the plasma weapons (CCC, p.95).

it is true that directed plasma warheads (CCC, p.112) has Mega-AP effects, but the bolt from these weapons isn't exactly a "warhead".

(note the difference among both CLP-1A, despite sharing the name (and the vehicular one is shown as mega-AP in the book). Errata?

I think they are both the same weapon. The only issue is if having Mega-AP is errata for one listing, or not having it is errata for the other.

See then hat most of those weapons are quite dangerous to everything except the heaviest tanks, and the more powerful of them also for them...

Even vs the heavy tanks, side armor is only around 70% of frontal armor, so a lot of these weapons can hole them.

 

[McPerth]

I don't think any of the man-portable plasma weapons have any AP effects, going by the stats of plasma Weapons in CCC (p.99) and nothing mentioned in the intro to the plasma weapons (CCC, p.95).

it is true that directed plasma warheads (CCC, p.112) has Mega-AP effects, but the bolt from these weapons isn't exactly a "warhead".

As I already said, I don't own CCC, but, if not a plasma bolt, then what's a plasma warhead?

ANd in classic 2300AD plasma weapons were tampered explosions, so good anti-armor weapons...

I think they are both the same weapon. The only issue is if having Mega-AP is errata for one listing, or not having it is errata for the other.

Not only this. THe one in page 156 is listed as 16d6 damage without any AP modifier, while the one in page 189 is listed as 8d6 mega-AP...

Does that mean that to be mega-AP it reduces the damage to half? is there an errata on any of them? I really don't know...

Even vs the heavy tanks, side armor is only around 70% of frontal armor, so a lot of these weapons can hole them.

The side armor is the mínimum I gave in my entry, being among 70-90. See that not many weapons can hole them. But, again, we're talking about heavy tanks...

 

[Brandon C]

As I already said, I don't own CCC, but, if not a plasma bolt, then what's a plasma warhead?

A directed plasma warhead is an enhanced shaped-charge warhead.

Inconveniently, almost none of the warheads list the TL of introduction.

Not only this. THe one in page 156 is listed as 16d6 damage without any AP modifier, while the one in page 189 is listed as 8d6 mega-AP...

The 16d6 is close to the 14d6 for the Plasma A gun in CCC 1e and S6. In neither case is AP effect improved. However, I don't know if this was changed to in the later combined S5/6.