Author Topic: Indirect Direct Fire?  (Read 11166 times)

Offline chribu

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 433
  • Karma: +19/-0
  • Keeping track of all the answers
Indirect Direct Fire?
« on: February 06, 2006, 07:33:46 AM »
Some GLs have Direct fire only, while others have Indirect fire.
How do I deal with "Direct fire" template rolls? The same way as indirect fire? i.e. roll to hit for each unit, add the amount missed by to AR?

Offline chribu

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 433
  • Karma: +19/-0
  • Keeping track of all the answers
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2006, 07:55:00 AM »
And what about AP Rockets (with RLs)?

Offline Gallagher_Standard_Barer

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Karma: +17/-1
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2006, 09:49:21 AM »
Attack rolls and damage are calculated in exatcly the same fasion for both direct and indirect grenade launchers.  The only difference is the path the projectile takes to the target.  Direct fire weapons fly in a straight line at the target, while indirect fire weapons follow a parabolic path,  this means two things, one indirect fire weapons ignore any cover the target is hiding behind, and that with the aid of a spotter who has LOS to the target the indirect fire weapon can fire over obstacles (provided both he and the target are at least as far away from the obstacle as half its height).

Offline chribu

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 433
  • Karma: +19/-0
  • Keeping track of all the answers
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2006, 11:01:07 AM »
Ok thanks!
Another: Do indirect fire weapons ignore MP?

Offline Gallagher_Standard_Barer

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Karma: +17/-1
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2006, 12:09:21 PM »
Yes, I believe that  they do, but am not as certain about MP as I am cover.

Offline dmcgee1

  • Board Member
  • Administrator
  • Member Emeritus
  • *****
  • Posts: 3179
  • Karma: +147/-7
  • Ask away!
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2006, 02:38:40 PM »
MP is ignore for indirect fire, as MP is a form of cover.  Remember, however, that trenches afford cover in the case of indirect fire.
If sing, sang, and sung, sink, sank, and sunk, and drink, drank, and drunk, how is it that it isn't bring, brang, and brung, think, thank and thunk, and ding, dang, and dung?

Don't even get me started about bad, badder and baddest.  Run, ran AND run...again?  C'mon!

Offline chribu

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 433
  • Karma: +19/-0
  • Keeping track of all the answers
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2006, 02:48:50 PM »
if only indirect fire ignores cover (not direct, ranged, template fire, like AP grenades), then why does directly placed template (e.g. FT) ignore cover?

Offline Gallagher_Standard_Barer

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Karma: +17/-1
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2006, 02:57:35 PM »
Its becuase of the path the projectile takes to the target.  A direct fired weapon flies in a straight line from the target to the shooter, meaning if they have cover the projectile will hit the cover and only some of the blast will be transferred to the target, whereas an indirect fire follows a parabolic path meaning it comes at the target more or less from above, thus going over the cover and landing right in the targets lap.  See the difference.  This also means indirect fire weapons cannot be used on someone under a roof, or inside a building, since the projectile couldn't get to the target since it would hit the roof first.

Offline chribu

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 433
  • Karma: +19/-0
  • Keeping track of all the answers
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2006, 02:59:31 PM »
yes, got that, but what about FT? i'd imagine cover giving some protection from flames coming towards me.

Offline dmcgee1

  • Board Member
  • Administrator
  • Member Emeritus
  • *****
  • Posts: 3179
  • Karma: +147/-7
  • Ask away!
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2006, 02:59:40 PM »
Because Directly Placed Templates represetn weapons that are unaffected by cover.  Flamethrowers were used widely in several wars to clear out tunnels, pillboxes, etc because they afforded no cover to the enemy.  The fire burned not only flesh, but consumed tohe available oxygen in the area, as well.

Shotguns are comprised of hundreds of pellet/flechettes that are designed for coverage over a wide area, ensuring that the targets are at least hit by some shrapnel.  Further, the weapons are, already limited in distance (7" - 10").  Balance that with the fact that they ignore cover, and you still have to use good tactics to get in and be able to use it, effectively, as you should have to do with any weapon.

The only cover from these is LOS.  You can't hit what you can't see.  
If sing, sang, and sung, sink, sank, and sunk, and drink, drank, and drunk, how is it that it isn't bring, brang, and brung, think, thank and thunk, and ding, dang, and dung?

Don't even get me started about bad, badder and baddest.  Run, ran AND run...again?  C'mon!

Offline Sylvas

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 819
  • Karma: +23/-0
  • Midwest Crusader
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2006, 07:01:32 PM »
yes, got that, but what about FT? i'd imagine cover giving some protection from flames coming towards me.

not at all...the flames would envelop all of the area around the cover...

B.
Flame On...
eBay name: sylvas1970

Offline PFC joe

  • Private First Class
  • Private First Class
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 874
  • Karma: +57/-2
  • assistance from a distance
    • PFC joe's After Action Reviews
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #11 on: February 06, 2006, 07:22:27 PM »
Honestly, if you want to make it entirely representitive of the really real world.  If you're firing an FT (full  size) indoors then you would make an attack against all models in the room (provided that it's smaller than a certain size)  as the burnin fluids tend to bounce, splash and on top of that incinerate tender lung tissues.  the only way to effectively avoid a FT is to shoot the user first.

-PFC joe
Qui desiderat pacem pręparet bellum

Offline chribu

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 433
  • Karma: +19/-0
  • Keeping track of all the answers
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #12 on: January 22, 2007, 09:24:26 AM »
And what about AP Rockets (with RLs)?
Still the same question. What about AP rockets?
If "Attack rolls and damage are calculated in exatcly the same fasion for both direct and indirect (grenade launchers)" then why aren't they calculated in the same fashion for AP rockets (as all RL are direct)?

Offline PFC joe

  • Private First Class
  • Private First Class
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 874
  • Karma: +57/-2
  • assistance from a distance
    • PFC joe's After Action Reviews
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2007, 09:19:16 PM »
Because there is a very large difference between a shaped charge that explodes on contact and funnels molten copper (or some future Martian metal) in a tight cone shaped pattern to defeat plate armor (standard rockets) and a warhead that explodes and blows shrapnel all over the place to rend armor and flesh and damage with concussive forces (anti personel).

in game terms, cause one is a big bullet and the other is a big bang.

-PFC joe

Qui desiderat pacem pręparet bellum

Offline chribu

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 433
  • Karma: +19/-0
  • Keeping track of all the answers
Re: Indirect Direct Fire?
« Reply #14 on: January 25, 2007, 02:47:20 AM »
So:
GL with direct and indirect fire, thrown weapons with template and mortars: ToHit roll for the template, reduce damage inflicted by the amount missed.
RL with AP rockets: ToHit roll for the template, if missed all miniatures under the template are safe.
?