wimpy Vehicle Combat?

[veltyen]

If the players guide ever comes out, that has certain toys that fit more into a modern manpat weapons then RAM grenades do. RAM grenades are more like high tech 40mm grenades then an anti-tank weapon. They're OK against light armour, but not anything heavy as you note.

Yes. It is a noticeable lack in the THB.

You could jury rig something from the Vehicle weapons. I was thinking one tube versions of the MRL's.

Light MANPAD (Based on light MRL)
TL 11
damage 6d8 personal 1d8 vehicle
range increment 900m
Area 3m
Weight (Launcher) 6kg
Weight (Missile) 5kg
Cost 50cr + 10cr /missile

A high tech anti-personal anti-light vehicle bazooka.

Medium MANPAD (Based on Medium MRL)
TL 6
damage 8d8 personal 3d8 vehicle
range increment 1.2km
Area 10m
Weight (Launcher) 45 kg
Weight (Missile) 50 kg
Cost 1250cr + 50cr /missile

Barely portable low tech missile launcher. More a weapon to set up in an defensive position then a mobile weapon.

Heavy MANPAD (based on heavy MRL)
TL 10
damage 11d8 personal 6d8 vehicle
range increment 2.1km
Area 20m
Weight (Launcher) 10 kg
Weight (Missile) 20 kg
Cost 500cr + 60cr /missile

The heavy companion to the Light MANPAD.

Note: Arbritarily I've used the cost of 10 tubes, but the weight of one. The price still seems a little low, though with an effective range of "eyeball" you'd want to add a (vehicle class) vision system, and they don't come cheap. Otherwise they are just a single tube version of the vehicle MRL's.

A TL14 heavy manpad (6d8 vehicle scale damage with AP7) is also not a cheap item, as the missile almost cost as much as a ship class missile. (4200 cr each). Even a TL10 one has 3000 cr missiles at AP5.

With a decent vision system, the heavy MANPAD can fling ordnance up to a 30km ceiling. Sure its unlikely to hit anything, but fire enough into the area and you have an effective mid and low altitude air defence.

 

[stofsk]

Plasma guns could be used for anti-armour combat, but it has that strange prerequisite for 'Armor Proficiency: Battledress'. It's the only weapon proficiency that has a prerequisite.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by stofsk:
Plasma guns could be used for anti-armour combat, but it has that strange prerequisite for 'Armor Proficiency: Battledress'. It's the only weapon proficiency that has a prerequisite.

PGMP and FGMP have always required Battledress to get the proficiency. As for anti-armor work, they are OK against light armor but against real armor are not very effective. They also have an extremely limited range. Even the big Fusion guns on the vehicles have limited effect against heavily armored vehicles. But then again, in the real world, the race between armor and armor defeating weapons, has usually, at least initially with the introduction of new armor, has usually favored the armor.

 

[veltyen]

PGMP are available before battledress is.

Ignore the pre-req when appropriate is all I suggest. That's a fairly specific TL12 niche where that makes sense though. At TL13+ BD becomes a standard item.

The other option is low tech BD. Considering even TL7 BD is doable under T20 that is the other option.

FGMP and PGMP are ok as short range ambush weapons. You need numbers of them at ludicrously short range which is the problem.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by veltyen:
PGMP are available before battledress is.

Ignore the pre-req when appropriate is all I suggest. That's a fairly specific TL12 niche where that makes sense though. At TL13+ BD becomes a standard item.

The other option is low tech BD. Considering even TL7 BD is doable under T20 that is the other option.

FGMP and PGMP are ok as short range ambush weapons. You need numbers of them at ludicrously short range which is the problem.

I never said that the rule was justified, just that it has always been there. It isn't a new rule specifically for T20. Only at TL-13 is BD actually required for an energy weapon and then only if you are uniformly equipped at one tech level. (It has always been that way.)

Without a Crit they still are unlikely to damage a Tank, or a well designed set of Battledress.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
PGMP and FGMP have always required Battledress to get the proficiency.

I'm away from home and my books but my memory is that the introduction of the PGMP does NOT require BD proficiency for use.

The way I recall it in CT (and presumably T20 and I think even MT and TNE) is a slow recovery PGMP as the introduction weapon firing one shot every other turn and an improvement when BD is introduced and allows heavy recoil compensation to permit firing at the normal one shot per turn.

Perhaps someone can check the book and confirm.

 

[mike wightman]

That't the way it works in CT, but in T20 to get the High Energy Weapons Weapon Proficiency feat you must have the prerequisite Battle Dress feat...
so in T20 a TL12 society can invent the PGMP12, but no one can use it without penalty until they reach TL13 and invent Battle Dress too

 

[archhealer]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
That't the way it works in CT, but in T20 to get the High Energy Weapons Weapon Proficiency feat you must have the prerequisite Battle Dress feat...
so in T20 a TL12 society can invent the PGMP12, but no one can use it without penalty until they reach TL13 and invent Battle Dress too

Sure they can. They just suffer a penalty.

Incidently, even before battle dress, at around TL9 or 10 you can build a relatively functionaly power-assisted external frame that you wear, that gives power assist to the wearer. Not much room left for armor or much else, but the batteries and powered limbs are there. IMTU, such suits are often used at lower TLs to allow use of heavy weaponry (Even on occasion lighter vehicle weapons wielded as personal weapons).

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by far-trader:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
PGMP and FGMP have always required Battledress to get the proficiency.

I'm away from home and my books but my memory is that the introduction of the PGMP does NOT require BD proficiency for use.

The way I recall it in CT (and presumably T20 and I think even MT and TNE) is a slow recovery PGMP as the introduction weapon firing one shot every other turn and an improvement when BD is introduced and allows heavy recoil compensation to permit firing at the normal one shot per turn.

Perhaps someone can check the book and confirm. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually I just reread the CT rules. I apparently misread the High Energy Weapons skill years ago and had it wrong. (Either that or I misremembered it.) Sorry about that.

 

[RoyHolder]

In the front, yes, an M1A2 can survive a 120mm APFSDS hit. But the sides and rear can and were penetrated by both friendly hellfire missiles (blue on blue) and T-72 KK rounds. Not penetrated enough to kill the crew, but enough for a mission kill.

Now, in T20, there IS no side armor, no acounting for penetrations and glancing hits, external damage...its not a tactical wargame. So, IMO, I might as well make armoured combat more lethal. Besides. It looks cooler to have tanks blowing up everywhere rather then hearing "Bang!" "plink", "Bang" "plink" resonate around the field as SI is slowly chipped away.

We have been using the every penetration that does SI rolls on internal damage table. That seems to make the vehicle too fragile.
While reading this thread, I thought that we should make a penetration that does more than 10+/- SI damage roll on internal.
that way, light plinks will only chip away at SI, and heavy solid hits will do internal.

 

[aramis]

If you go that route, MBT's will fall apart (No SI) before they stop functioning, as the heavy armor will reduce the vast majority of hits to 1-3 points. Meanwhile, any hit significant enough to reduce the function of a bike will likely total said bike anyway.

 

[RoyHolder]

After posting before,I was also thinking about 10% or 20% SI damage in 1 hit would roll on the internal damage table.
A small bike, would need a smaller Hit than a Heavy tank to cause a roll.
And, unarmored vehicles, could take enough damage from small arms bursts to get a roll on internal damage, While a tank could not.

 

[aramis]

Roy: are you remembering that Vehicles get 5 extra AV vs personal weapons? (I remember that being an issue in playtest...) Starships get 10...

 

[RoyHolder]

Yes,

but a small arms SMG or AR 4 round bust can get 10% SI on unarmored vehicles.

 

[shadowdragon]

backing up to earlier posts re: fusion guns.

why would low tech armor even survive contact with a fusion guns discharge? iirc the temperature where hydrogen fuses is in fact several magnitudes above the melting point for even armor grade steels and ceramics, not to mention differential heating at that level can cause explosive fracturing due to expansion stresses. i would require a vehicle to have extremely modern armor (TL 14+ at the least) to begin to use its AR value against fusion guns. but thats just me.

 

[aramis]

Yes,

but a small arms SMG or AR 4 round bust can get 10% SI on unarmored vehicles.

which are still AV 5 vs personal weapons. that 1d10 damage doesn't go very far.