Dark_au

it actually leads to a good question if the shrike and the paladin are as unstable as they seem to be when you drive them how come sabot rounds don't pick them up and throw them. This isn't as far fetched as you may think I've read reports of M3 stuarts bieng thrown flying by 88mm hits.

Actually if you want to get technical the unit doing the firing usually has dirty great big recoil dampeners and a barrel that slides in to absorb the hitting a wall at 50mph. Its not hard to work out the kinetic energy if you know the mass of the round and its muzzle velocity. 0.5*mass*V^2

anything which encourages sitting still in a mobile asset in plain sight is wrong.

Dan... there you nail it on the head and thats the clincher to my argument. If someone has no idea what to do to keep out of sight then the magically good AAD protecting him teaches the wrong lesson. Do we want new players learning the wrong lessons and cheapen the game or bieng forced (by circumstances) to learn the right way. The analogy to the M1 breaks down though because a TC doesn't have that magical overhead view for situational awareness, nor the red marker or lack of green marker to id its owner.

Ok some simple sollutions. 1. Leave the effectiveness as is but only allow it to target rounds that pass above the plane of its guns. 2. Leave its effectiveness vs Artillery the same(ish) but remove its ability to take on 120mm or below and allow chaining of artillery (bots) to a player command and fire salvos to overload it. 3. Leave it exacly as is (for the towers) but make it so the guns on the towers can be individually damaged / destroyed by ION fire.

Dan, Tactical sense never changes. It is a simple concept and will remain true into the future as it HAS remained true since people like Sun Tzu first wrote about it. Cover, Concealment (of you actions / intentions if not your movements ) and Manaeouver. If these things are not true to this game then why the hell do we have such nice intricate interesting terrain for working in. If a tank is a tank then its expectancy is for it to work like a tank. The point of a tank is NOT TO SIT STILL. There have never been tank battles where staying still was the key to winning. No matter what you may have read or think you've read about the way tanks are used. In WW2 a Tiger did not sit still expecting its armour to save it. Even a big lumbering beast like that was constanly on the move cos the alternative is death. In fact the times when tanks have been used in stationary roles the results have been devastating ( French 1940, Iraqii's in GW 1&2 ). This is not to say that you don't have static defence points. The thing is with those is that you still aren't supposed to hang around. Expose yourself, Fire 2-3 rounds, Displace. If these things in the game are tanks then the same tactical sense applies to them as to any historical analogy. Otherwise they aren't tanks. The basics are Still cover, concealment and manaeouver. Now I know I'm not alone in understanding this because Nexus and I had some very fun hunts the other day using just these basic principals. It was much more rewarding than just dumb static defence and by defending with a scouting / patrolling force they actually defended much more convincingly.

Before I post this I will re-iterate that my grievance with AAD in this post is with its ability vs 120mm rounds and smaller. NOT about artillery as some would imply. This comment is only regarding The mentions of arty in others threads. Clay, in your comments on Twin peaks tactics you give the sound tactical advice that digging in is an important factor, Cover and concealment. When you talk about the artillery bieng too strong in testing don't forget it had a bug in it which made it cause too much damage. With that now reduced I don't think you'll find arty is at all dominating. The natural enemy to artillery is artillery. The way to stop the enemy from supressing you with artillery is to locate and suppress his artillery first.

Well I'm obviously the only one who feels this way so its not for me. I guess I'm on a different book of strategy to the rest of the community, let alone a different page. In answer to your comments Clay and others:- Artillery isn't even deadly anymore without the AAD. With it its tits on a bull. There is no point to having arty in this game anymore. Its like having a Bow on a modern battlefield. Unless you get a direct hit even paladins ignore it. And to use your example if the guy drops his paladin within range of an arty piece then he deserves to die. This is the whole point I'm getting at, Instead of finding a new dropzone which is a tactically sound sollution just drop inside their arc with a hermes and let the hurrican kill itself when it tries to fire at you. Result a system that rewards tactically bad play and assists that bad play to work. Again though everyone goes back to artillery. I was originally and contiuously refering NOT to its effectiveness re artillery but with its effectiveness re tank rounds and smaller. This leads to things like Infantry lying around in plain site under an AAD relying on the AAD to save their ass from their own tactical ineptitude agains other infantry. It rewards someone who is doing tactically unsound things like parking a tank in plain site under an AAD tower over someone who is doing tactically sound things like combat manaeouver. Sound tactical use should be rewarded so should skill, Unsound tactical use should be punished ( by dying when someone in a tactically sound position gets the drop on you). The whole point of a tank having the ability to move is for Tactical Manaeouver warfare. The Idea bieng that you don't sit still with your tanks in one place. Or just travelling out in the open. This is the sort of behaviour that should lead to someones untimely end. Instead they can cover their mistakes with the overpowered AAD. In the circumstance where I have a tank in a good ambush position and open fire on a target that I have a good chance to hit then I should be rewarded, the person just scooting in the open deserves to die. As it is they can call down the magic galaxy to protect them and I am supposed to switch to COAX to defeat their AAD first when i had the drop on them?. And then I can't defeat their AAD on my own and fire 120mm so they get cheap shots at me as a reward for tactical stupidity. The same goes with the Tanks sitting under AAD. The defencive tanks should gain their strength from utilising the terrain, Adopting Hull-down positions with a quick displacement route. That should be rewarded by alowing them to mount a cohesive defence when called to. Having this magic AAD to protect you against other tanks means that you don't have to do sensible tactical things but yuo still get rewarded. That is not what I paid my $40 for.

Current DU and the German Tungsten based alternative both use a defined crystaline structure which causes the shards to be sharp WHEN the penetrator shears. If you notice I have been trying for a while to come up with options to the AAD problem. Its become more defined when they can swat 10mm rounds. I just can't believe the miss-use of AAD tactically is in the spirit which the game was intended.

Ok this is updated. The same link should work. Clay made some new grasses for it and changed the look with them. I've also updated it with a provisional inventory.

Right I agree ion's / laser do make some sense.. however they are also hideously easy to defeat too. Putting a strong enough magnetic field on a round would defeat charged particle. if its laser then just make your KE penetrator out of some dense crystal with a suitable refractory/ reflectory index. Or have sand casters, or ablative layers. Or use rail guns with your limitless energy and kick out slugs at 4km / sec. Intercept that one.... And if the intercepting round is some form of pellet then show me the calculations for dual curve intercepts with appropriate lead quick enough to hit a shell in flight as it leaves your barrell.

If the AAD only dealt with Artillery, Dropships and Missiles I could live with it. I've resigned myself to artillery bieng useless now. Even if you can get a round past all the AAD its yeald is so low as to make the effort pointless. I still think its too effective against Arty (even in the slammers AAD isn't infallible and there are ways around it when they need to like submunition rounds). Personally even having a 1 in 3 chance of arty getting through would be better. What I really can't relate to is the AAD taking out MBT rounds and smaller especially 10mm from infantry. It just doesn't add up to me. If there is a way to defeat the rounds then the basics of military science says you would come up with a counter to the counter. If they can produce the plasma turrets which have an infinite ammo load that can't be defeated by AAD(and fits in such a small package with a great recharge rate) then why isn't that the main weapon of tanks.

in the Hermes one where is the sensor for the AAD and the AAD... if there is enough room in there for the suite then every thor should have one..

No its not just about artillery. I've hardly been using them because they are pointlessly ineffective now. Mostly of recent I've been in either a thor or an Apollo. The damn AAD knocks out MBT rounds, HEAT, HE, 20mm, 10mm. I'm just sick of people using the defence of those rather than come up with a tactically sound sollution. I mean infantry out in the open using the AAD to swat incoming 10mm rounds is a joke. I've even seen people moving through open ground calling the Galaxy to defend them when they take fire. Rather than displacing and doing something realistic. Clay this business about bieng able to overwhelm a galaxy isn't right... We had 3 of us the other day trying and it still kept batting away all the rounds.

Sorry but AAD has killed this game for me. Its too easy to abuse and leads people to do tactically stupid things and survive. Like sitting out in the open relying on AAD to keep them safe. The damn things even swat 10mm out of the air..

no sorry last thing this game needs is anymore AAD.. it already has too much

To stop it bieng too powerful with the AAD missiles is there a way to only allow it to have 1 missile in the air?.

Yeah That sort of thing would work too. Shrikes with a 14mm MG and sod all else painted to look like technicals. What about having bolt together parts. Like Diesel Powered Tracked Chassis and say a Turbine powered wheeled chassis ( in 4 , 6 and 8 wheeled ), a variety of low tech turrets and have them be able to be called in the scenario itself.

Gday, Clay has kindly uploaded my latest mission. Get it Here Cornered Rats. This is quite a simple mission. There are 2 wrecks, in opposite corners. Each team owns one and wants to own both. Each teams objective is the center of the other teams deployment zone. The zones for capture are only 500m but the Deployment zone is 8000m. The intention is to allow both teams to deploy a defence in depth. Obviously the more you exert in Offence the less defence you can mount and Visa Versa. Its not quite finished yet. Clay said he wanted to do something with the Ground cover and I will probably do a restricted inventory. I don't want people to use the Herpes loophole to defeat defences. I'm thinking of making it mainly Tanks with the major bieng the Apollo. Maybe some light arty and infantry / scout units.

I think a lot of it would depend apon its intended role and how you designed it. Rotors are no use but Vectorable jets / rockets would give the same effect. Again thinking of the Flying HK's from Terminator. I think the Unit Yurch is describing above would be too powerfull but very doable. However I could see much more use and balance if it was more based on the Comanche idea. A small, light stealth vehicle who's major role is scouting / Forward Recon / CAS. Maybe an Ion or a 20mm and 4 ATGM's and the EW package from the Herpes to give it a fighting chance... Maybe only give it EW capability vs Deployed turrets rather than against fixed AAD emplacements. This would be especially usefull for the FO role.

Yeah that was some good hunting time

Like it a lot Clay, Love the use of colour. It reminds me of the Moors. I actually like the lack of trees it gives it a bleak feel which is amplified by the cold looking background. I especially like the areas of shallow water with the grass growing through. If you have a spare colour on your mask you could maybe edge some of those areas with tall reeds . If any vegetation went onto that map maybe some low scrubby gorse type bushes. Maybe for ambient noise the sound of a slow ocean rolling and some alien "seagull" sounds. I approached the Objective Island from the SE and it has a sort of uncanny shape. Now I don't know if you guys are old enough to remember them but there were some books put out in the late 70's / early 80's Under ther name of something like the Terran Trade Authority handbooks. They were books of SF art involving spaceships and some text, done like a contemporary aircraft book. One in particular I loved was Spaceships 2100 - 2300. The back section of it was called unidentified objects and had all these pictures of wierd wrecks and odd alien ships. Very much like the derelict in Alien. I imediately thought of those when I saw that Isle and thought some uncanny alien articaft would just seal the bleak, creepy feel.

Obviously the units we have are the pinacle of current "human" technology in the game universe. It would be nice if there was lower tech level equipment too (like the Indig forces that the Slammers are always sneering at). With the inventory system it would then be possible to make scenarios where the main forse on one side is indig equipment backed up by a small number of high tech stuff.

Or some form of Celiopter (like the HK things in terminator)

Can people please suggest some ideas for scenarios. I can do the technical side a lot easier than I can come up with lots of concepts. So if there is anything you think would make an interesting scenario add something in here. It could be ideas for settings, concepts for the scenarios themselves whatever... And no I haven't forgotten golan heights. I think it was Aittam asking for that. If you want to give me a lat long grid ref for the center I can produce a map for you at least. Use google earth or some such. Keep in mind though that for maps based on real world data (outside USA) the maximum resolution of free data is 90m point spacing.