Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Board and Card Games > Car Wars

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-01-2017, 01:53 AM   #21
Racer
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, UK
Default Re: Smart linking Turrets: If B-29 had them, then why not?

But then larger vehicles with lots of Turrets & Sponsons would then need many Computer Gunners , as you wouldn't be able to have that many Firing Actions from Human Crew Members ?

In heavy Combats - particularly Pack Attacks & Military Firefights - you certainly DO NEED to take out Multiple targets as fast as possible . Smart Links are an easy solution to these problems , without having to resort to the headaches of many Computer Gunners or Remote Control Receiver Units ...
__________________
Five Gauss Guns on a Camper !!!
Racer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2017, 01:07 PM   #22
swordtart
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Default Re: Smart linking Turrets: If B-29 had them, then why not?

Except that 5 linked turrets isn't a benefit against normal pack attacks (i.e. many light vehicles), you would prefer 5 gunners so you could target 5 different enemies (or target a single enemy in 5 different phases so you could trash his HS).

For oversized vehicles (i.e. rigs), you probably want lots of crew (not just for fights, but also for humping all that cargo). Depending on your world economy it may be cheaper to hire a Gunner (2) than to buy a +2 computer and hire a Gunner (0).

You might have a hybrid system with lots of cheap adequate gunners for when you want lots of guns on lots of targets, with a few really good gunners with smart links.
swordtart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2017, 02:18 PM   #23
Lindmark71
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Default Re: Smart linking Turrets: If B-29 had them, then why not?

A "should" without a very good "why" is of no value.

Also, a SWC is identical in nature to a cyberlink: one crew, one (non-smart) linked set of weapons.

For everything else, including smartlinks, there's the normal targeting computer (and hi-res).

Drive offensively.

Curt
Lindmark71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2017, 02:01 AM   #24
swordtart
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Default Re: Smart linking Turrets: If B-29 had them, then why not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindmark71 View Post
A "should" without a very good "why" is of no value.

Also, a SWC is identical in nature to a cyberlink: one crew, one (non-smart) linked set of weapons.

For everything else, including smartlinks, there's the normal targeting computer (and hi-res).

Drive offensively.

Curt
Not sure which comment this is directed at, but as I seem to be one of the dissenting voices.

The rules for smartlinks were fluid and seem to vary depending on the editor of the day. I am not happy with the conclusions of the last man out of the door, so I am applying logic rather than citing precedence.

A smartlink can slave a weapon to another weapon with no targeting computer and acquires all the to hit modifiers of that weapon e.g. range, smoke, gunner skill, tracer etc. Ergo targeting computers play no part in the operation of the smart link, regardless of how you target that single weapon, the smart link must follow suit.

In effect you are slaving the weapons to one another by complex algorithms in the smart link itself i.e. if weapon 1 is at azimuth 15.034 and pointing at bearing 234.456 then the smartlink works out where in spherical coordinates it is pointing and calculates where to move the slaved gun to hit the same point. This has nothing to do with the targeting computer as it all works fine without one (and for other bonuses like tracer).

All the targeting computer does is enable you to get the optimal aim point for the first weapon.

There is no particularly logical argument for no SWC with smartlinks and the ruling is almost certainly in place instead because of that perennial favourite - Game Balance (which is why different editors have had a different take). In fact there is already plenty of balance The benefit of having a regular computer rather than a single weapon computer is that you can aim the slaved weapon independently of the smartlink and you will benefit from the computer. Note also that if your SWC weapon can only trace LOS through smoke, then you have to apply that negative as well and may end up missing with both that weapon and the slaved one rather than being able to hit with at least the smartlinked weapon had you aimed it independently. You can also aim other weapons that are not even connected to the smart link and benefit from a regular computer. Of course the killer argument in all Game Balance arguments is "everyone is allowed one" - there are no faction dictated equipment lists in CW.

SWC + Smartlink should be a perfectly valid combination for small vehicles with only a couple of linked weapons. Nine times out of ten you would still probably be better-off buying a regular computer, but if you manage your fights to mitigate the inherent weakness more power to you.

Cycberlinked cupolas with smartlinks are hideously expensive and require expensive platforms to mount them on.

You can play whatever rules you like, but I prefer my rules to have a grain of common sense in them ;)

Last edited by swordtart; 09-18-2017 at 02:08 AM.
swordtart is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.