tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8679502135305474897.post6610717509695836414..comments2023-03-23T18:39:14.345-07:00Comments on Skill Level 0: Rayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06410087854971560196noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8679502135305474897.post-8750792314893298122012-02-04T15:50:53.358-08:002012-02-04T15:50:53.358-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06410087854971560196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8679502135305474897.post-23102035492799820382012-02-04T15:50:14.248-08:002012-02-04T15:50:14.248-08:00Good points Dylan!
As we keep playing we keep fi...Good points Dylan! <br /><br />As we keep playing we keep fiddling. From you feedback, the current rules need a re-write for clarity. <br /><br />I agree that the FGMP are deadly. You look at Striker and it was pretty much a hit was a kill - even with battledress. <br /><br />The big difference between the PGMP and the FGMP is that FGMP hits are dealt with as if they were a flamethrower. For personnel, that means a kill on 1-5 and no effect on 6. We could reduce survivability even more by making 6 a "roll on the basic first aid table' instead. <br /><br />Using this rule, the FGMP were shredding their opponents.Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06410087854971560196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8679502135305474897.post-44839235280474261802012-02-04T12:19:30.300-08:002012-02-04T12:19:30.300-08:00Awesome. Some interesting thoughts and possibilit...Awesome. Some interesting thoughts and possibilities.<br /><br />I've been a bit closer to the RAW in my treatment of PGMPs/FGMPs. <br /><br />I wonder about the lack of difference between PGMPs and FGMPs in terms of firepower. I'd be inclined to give PGMPs two dice and FGMPs three dice AP. In regular Traveller FGMPs seem a step up - certainly are in Striker.<br /><br />I agree that two dice AT is plenty, and I agree the PGMP-12 should only get one. I'm a bit confused by your notation of weapons as "Medium Infantry Support Weapon for AT purposes". Given that you've rated them with an AT factor, wouldn't that mean they roll as AT weapons and do not suffer the -2 penalty when rolling for damage (see TW page 114 bottom left)? If you want them to be infantry support weapons then shouldn't you delete the AT factors you've given them (which are meaningless as if you are using the non-AT rules you use the AP factor).dylanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11669778678182740270noreply@blogger.com