I agree that the major problem (not only one) with AP, is it's use with arty.

Since AP is optional, why not have a 'to hit' penalty when using AP rounds (declared when placing marker(s) and assessed when resolved). Perhaps a +2 would be in order.

For the time being, I'm looking forward to next week and perhaps fielding a 153pt. formation of killer artillery. You see, I've pulled 2 SS Arrow IV's out of 20 boosters and I have a case comming this week. :cool:

wow this degraded.

Anyway, if you look at the attack based special equipment, everything has a disadvantage for using it. except Armor Piercing

Streak -1 damage
Pulse +2 to hit, +1 heat (not to mention that you have to hit first)
Rapid Strike +1 Heat
Alpha strike (shutdown)
HtH special equipment. reduced damage (If you have ever rolled a 1, you know what I mean)
So that leaves brawling, which admittatly doesnt really have a downside, unless you take into account that it does require you to be in base contact.

And then there is AP ......nothing

Now, there is a down fall with a +2 to hit when using AP.
it encourages charge

Also it was mentioned that AP doesnt work unless you get a 5 or 6 on the back dice. which is also a good idea.

You're one to talk Pryde. I try to extend some kind of olive branch and you still insist on insulting me.
Any way, refering back to why this whole thing started was because I was responding to a previous post which said that AP rounds are really just giant slugs that punch through the armour.
As for your last comment, I thought it was pretty clear as to which word to spread. I wasn't refering to you in particular, but everyone as a whole.

Anyways, why are you even on this thread if you're supposed to be writing a term paper?

Unfortunately I forgot who suggested about a dice roll to see if AP is effective, but, I have to admit, I think it is much better then my suggestion of +2 to unit defence.

And it doesn't have to be a 5 or 6. it could be a 4,5,6 or anything really.

now it doesnt effect accuracy.

What about keeping AP at its current effectiveness against Heavy and Hardened armors unchanged, but allow Reactive armor (and Decoy) to act against AP? Slightly tones down the power of AP and doesn't require 'extra' die rolls to see if it penetrates.

As a SW player, I like this, but overall... not sure if enough units between the other factions have reactive armor to make this change meaningful...

I do agree with the AP does NOT negate Decoy, hopefully we see this in a new FAQ...

My rationale behind the proposal is that reactive armor is actually designed specifically to defeat certain types of AP ordnance. It just seems to make sense from a logic standpoint, and would be simple to implement (no special changes required to the rules, just modify the SE card).

Don't know what the factional or unit breakdown on reactive armor is (whether one faction has significantly more units with it than another, or whether it's predominantly a vehicle rather than 'mech SE); would be interesting to see a breakdown. If we accept the premise that SW may have more units that currently have reactive armor currently, that could easily be 'corrected' in future releases to give a better distribuition of the SE to other factions (I'm thinking long term rather than a quick-fix approach).

Ok, here's an idea. What if AP worked against all defensive SE except Reactive Armor?

Reflective armor is effective against all types of lasers and vulnerable against all types of ballistic attacks, so why should reactive be vulnerable to all laser attacks AND armor piercing which is a ballistic attack?

It also seems from what I can tell of how reactive armor works (exploding outward to counter the force of the incoming round) that it should counter any kind of ballistic attack, AP or not.

This would also allow units with reactive armor to be used to counter the current AP artillery frenzy that we all love (to hate). I feel something like this is necessary so that there is a natural counter to this tactic.

Anyway, just an idea.

-WHZ

[edit] and of course clown posts the same thing while I'm typing this... so yeah

I didn't see any sort of suggestion that you were promoting peace or an apology, merely continuing to criticize how I acted. I continued to berate you because you obviously felt I was at fault for some reason. That is also why I thought the word you were spreading was referring to my attitude because you addressed me in it.
As for your post, I already have my response for it (which you took offense to) and my opinion with it still stands... though I did see an interesting episode of Mail Call regarding your modern AP ammo and the M1-Abrams tank ;-P
Autocannons are a completely different issue from today's guns and cannons. Just punching a hole through armor with a solid slug would be infeasible, because it would actually do minimal damage to the internal structure of a mech. There's a bonus to having the limbs and stuff for a mech, your components are distributed through-out the mech, with much less of a chance of crippling a mech via a single salvo. A tank is a casket with treads, if your armor is penetrated by a big solid slug, there's a high chance that a vital component will be destroyed that cripples the tank, or personel will be killed. Same with a person wearing protective body armor, so long as the bullet has the velocity to penetrate, there's a very good chance the person will be put out of commission.

That's it for theorizing on that, in my part. Oh btw, I was multi-tasking (the paper was just about finished ;-P)... apology accepted (wherever it was)


I just realized, while AP not ignoring something like Decoy makes sense (I said that earlier) but if a unit appears with 23 defense and decoy (which we haven't seen yet, to my knowledge) and AP doesn't affect it, thats pretty scary (YES!! it hit your mech... what?? I have to REROLL?!) I can also agree with Reactive armor, which proves a better argument than Decoy because laser and melee attacks will not suffer the damage penalty. But if I supported that as a single exception, it wouldn't make sense. So therefore I say AP is fine in terms of balance.


Now, about AP and Artillery. Would you rather have artillery doing 4-5 damage, or 2 with AP? Case in point, Arrow IVs do 20 damage on CBT scale (don't say CBT has nothing to do with this, Arrow IVs are Arrow IVs) the equiv of the AC/20. I have no explanation for the SS DI Towed AA, thats more a SS trait issue. The only thing I can advocate is an increased cost in points. There is such a thing as anti-mech artillery (and Arrow IVs are quite good at it... ever TAGGED a mech in the back and sent a homing round straight in to his rear CT? Try it sometime, I destroyed a Jagermech III with my Eagle's TAG ;-P)

Locally we play most of our fun games with arty making defense checks and AP not applying vs decoy. Among other things. It works out nicely.

The comment about reactive defeating AP is a very interesting one I will need to think on and give some play time.
So lets see how this looks. 34 pieces have Reactive. 15 of which are mechs.
92 pieces have Decoy 34 of those are mechs. The laio shockwave has a 22 defence. Gus Edington gets a 22 with single use.
35 pieces have either heavy or hardened armor. 23 of those are mechs.
There are 432 pieces with none of those defence SE. 150 of those are mechs.
There are 149 pieces with AP. 53 of tose are mechs.
(go battleplanner)
So, if as was mentioned, Decoy and reactive armor defeated AP we would have 126 pieces that would take advantage of this change. Out of 729 pieces I dont think that upsets our balance.
Other than numbers what other things would happen if this change was made?
/me promoting discussion

If a 23 def unit with decoy appeared and AP was made not to affect it, I would be concerned. But I don't like waiting for things to go bad.

I fully agree with that. If a 23 def. mech came out it would make decoy ugly if AP did not work against it. However with a nice ranged formation hitting that shouldnt be that hard. On the same note what would be decoys counter? The counter to reactive would be energy, but what breaks decoy? Retargeting perhaps?
Thoughts?

Man, Pryde that would be pretty dosh garn huge. If AP wouldn't work on decoy and I used a unit like that, I'd feel dirty...

Hmmm, is there a unit with 23 defense and point defense?...(I think you know what I'm thinking)

22 def with PD...