Re: [HoE] Anti-Vehicular Weapons

[Sam & Max <samnmax1@earthlink.net>]

Steve Crow wrote:

> Small Arms constitutes any damage up to 4d10
> Light Weapons:  5d10 - 4d12
> Heavy Weapons:  5d12 - ??? (4d20, see next line)
> Anti-Vehicle Weapons:  There don't seem to be a lot, but if you follow a
> (sort of) logical progression, it would be anything from 5d10 up.

That sounds good. Honestly I haven't heard any way of dealing with it better.
Only thing I would change is cut off Small arms at D8s.

> I don't have Road Warriors right here, but we were working with the tank
> types listed there.  Two tanks of the heavy-duty type listed there, firing
> head on at each other, will do (if they're lucky) about 10 points of damage,
> tops.  Having Armor 16 tends to really, really reduce damage.  The tanks
> have Armor 12 on the sides, of course, and I think we figuring the 10 damage
> from that.  It might have been less, I'm quoting from memories...

The Powell M-26 has front armor of 16, that is a tanks hardest armor
traditionally. The other armor ratings are 12 although no armor is listed for
its Top location. Hmm must be a typo. A place that is usually sought out by hop
missiles and aircraft.  ?

From what I see in the Road Warrior book you would have 3D4 remaining after a
front hit by a similarly equipped tank. If I did the math right.  And about 6D6
on a side or rear hit. That's not to shabby although most Tank rounds are
designed for a one shot one kill. The average damage from a side or rear hit
(which you want to go for) is 21 points. Not counting the Ace effect. So say 30
Points.
            Hmm just noticed the Powells durability is 10/ 100..
            Shouldn't that be 20 / 100? If its 20 you only popped one
durability level. And got a big ball of meanness interested in you.

As far as the real deal goes it varies greatly from tank to tank but the US
M1A2 Abrams has an effective thickness of approximately 28 inches ceramic
hollow spaced Armor on the front slope. This is not the most armored tank in
the world but it is one of the most advanced and survivable.
The only facts I have are based on two weapons. The TOW IIAlpha (Big Anti Tank
Missile) / The 120mm Smooth Bore Sabot (which has an acronym as long as your
arm.  APFSDUDS) Silly aint it.
And some anecdotal evidence from the Maverick AGM 65.  That's the one that made
the A-10 famous. Well that and the front 30 mm cannon. :)

The TOW IIA doesn't penetrate Abrams well due to hollow spaced armor. It
disperses the plasma jet after initial penetration.  This didn't stop the TOW
from zapping older Russian tanks that relied on solid composite armor. This is
why the US army has moved away from the use of HEAT and HEAP rounds.  They now
rely on a smooth bore firing a Sabot'ed penetrator. Which kills almost
anything.

Speaking of that Sabot. The super acronym weapon will kill an Abrams on a front
shot. Nearly guaranteed.  This could be modeled in the game by simply giving
the round an incredible AP level. Say 15. Really. And a nil blast radius. Like
5D20 Blast Radius 0.  Sabots during Desert Storm put nice smooth holes straight
as an arrow through russian T-72's.  You could stand on one side and shine
flashlights through the carcasses. A player in my posse did on several
occasions.

On the effectiveness of a AGM-65 Maverick.  I don't really have any facts on
this weapon really aside from viewed wreckage. It peeled open russian tanks
easy, often blowing the turrents off to about 20 feet away.  These hit through
the roof but again the Powell Roof armor was left out. Not that it really
mattered. :)  The Iron Oasis rules for aircraft don't list any AGM's. Aside
from the LGAT which ends up hitting weakly as well.

>
>
> It seems like Slow Burnin' Sykers must have played a major part in taking
> out tanks during the last big wars.  Assuming they could get 12 rounds to
> hit the side of one of those big tanks.  But if they can buy themselves that
> much time (or someone buys it for them), and given they have a +12 for
> Aimin', it seems like they're about the only thing short of carpet bombing
> (under the new massive damage rules) that will slow down most tanks.

Sykers would seems to be the weapon du jour. And a good one as well. Although
that AA Laser that pops planes would be nasty if some (smart) tanker-type
programmed it to immediately zap those fleshy little Sykers as soon as Slow
Burn was detected.  ZAP! (Poof!)  :)

> We're not military experts, but are tanks really that hard to take out with
> weaponry specifically intended to use against tanks...?

I am not expert either. But the Tank rounds should hit harder. Considering
there rarity it wouldn't be a game balance issue to boost there power.  The
weapons mounted on MBT are design to kill other tanks, not wound them. :)  Man
portable stuff like the venerable LAW, which is replaced with the AT-4, are
designed to hit weak places on the tank. Just as the TOW should be aimed. The
Turret side armor or the Bezel ring where the turret meets the chassis. ANYWAY!
After all this technical mumbo jumbo..... yes! :) They should hit harder!
Hehe!

Name                  Shots       Speed     Rof     Range
Damage                                    Cost
Sabot 125mm        1                3           1       500           AP 15 /
5D20                       A whole lot! Really! (Your best guess!)
Maverick AGM65  1               2           1       70"           AP  10/
6d20 Burst 10         Probably more than the sabot. :)
TOWIIA                1               5           1        300          AP   8
/   6D20 Burst 1          Plenty okay.


Anyway these are what I am guessing at.  They could be modeled better as the
TOW has a relatively  easy targeting system and a definite max range. It's wire
guided and the wire stops at 3750 meters. IIRC.

woof! Anyway sorry about the huge post. Hope it helps.

--
David Heth
"Pow! And the syker is vapor!"