Artillery.

[CRMcNeill]

I have some thoughts on the Minefield Artillery Shell. One of my references on artillery leading into this project was Renegade Legion, which uses a hex map for vehicle combat, and actually has rules for artillery-delivered and vehicle deployed minefields.

Now, in their system, a minefield occupies an entire map hex, which is 200 meters in diameter. So what I'm thinking is this:

-A Minefield Shell creates a minefield in a 100-meter radius around the point of impact.

-Because the shot is not targeted at an individual, but rather a point on a map, there is no Scale modifier.

-On a failed Gunnery roll, the Minefield is still deployed, but deviates 10 meters from the aim point for every point of Miss (using the Grenade Scatter diagram to determine direction).

-If an enemy is able to use Sensors to track artillery shells, they will be able to identify Minefield Shells in flight and identify where the minefield is deployed. As such, Minefield Shells are generally used as a stop-gap, to either delay or block enemy forces while more robust minefields are deployed at ground level, or to harass and ambush units with no way to detect the shells in flight.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[garhkal]

What sort of mines would be deployed? Standard pressure detection/detonation AP mines? Grav mines for repulsor vehicles (if so, i can see the area of deployment being a lot less than a 100 meter radius, may 60 meter).
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[CRMcNeill]

[CRMcNeill]

One of the things I've wanted to introduce was a rule allowing some artillery cannon to be used in a direct-fire mode, as well as a ballistic one. I've also been struggling with a way to incorporate different real-world terms into this system. A possible solution that has presented itself is to use "cannon" to describe a direct-fire weapon, and "mortar" to describe a ballistic weapon. The most obvious term for a weapon that combines both direct-fire and ballistic capabilities into a single weapon is "howitzer", but I'm hesitant to use it, as the term appears nowhere in the existing canon (in fact, searching Wookieepedia for "howitzer" resulted in just one result, under Proton Torpedoes in the Behind The Scenes section).

It's difficult to track down the real-world origin for "howitzer", as there are similar words describing the same basic thing across multiple European languages. This is compounded by the fact that the definition of a howitzer has changed over time. In fact, in modern US military terminology, a howitzer now describes exactly what I want it to. The problem is that I have no precedent for including it into the SWU; "mortar", at least, has some history behind it, and the origin of the term (literally, that it looked like a large mortar missing its pestle) is pretty straightforward.

Anyway, I'm open to suggestions. If you've got a conclusive reasoning for why "howitzer" might develop as a term in the SWU, I'm all ears...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[CRMcNeill]

Another thought that's been bouncing around is the idea of "Ortillery", a contraction of Orbital Artillery. I got the idea from Renegade Legion, where most legions have a "Rocket Launch" company, whose stated mission is the deployment of various types of satellites, including orbital bombardment kill-sats. Of course, in the SWU, there are more high-tech options, such as the RAGOC (Repulsor-Assisted Ground-to-Orbit Concussion Missile Launcher). I picture dedicated units of Pressor Beam Launch Platforms using focused tractor beams in "push" mode to loft satellites into orbit, with options for Comm-Sats, Spy-Sats and Kill-Sats (with the Kill-Sats configured for orbital bombardment or space denial / satellite defense).

In Renegade Legion, the Kill-Sats are called THORs, so named after the Kinetic energy weapons they fire for precision strikes against ground targets. I picture these satellites being about the size of a small starfighter, fully automated, with the kill-sats being equipped with a light turbolaser, a self-defense blaster and a few ordnance launchers that can be configured for ground or space attack...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[RyanDarkstar]

https://youtu.be/DAuAlsnwMik

Watched this today. I didn't know if there was anything that would add to the subject of flak artillery.
_________________
Currently playing D&D 5E and painting an unholy amount of miniatures.

[CRMcNeill]

I always assumed sold shell flak was a thing in the SWU, and that the shells would be appropriately high tech (in both proximity detonation and warhead capability). A cluster flak shell flinging a cloud of thermal detonators at a target (ala the cluster pod from Dark Force Rising) would be appropriately Star Wars, too.

Depending on the method of propulsion, any sort of direct-fire mass driver cannon should be capable of firing shells like this. The main restriction would be things like low-velocity mortars and similar high-arc ballistic weaponry that don't have the sort of barrel strength needed to contain the explosive force that's used to fire a high velocity shell. Now, a high tech version that uses rail/coil technology or some sort of gravity or repulsor weapon, on the other hand...

But the main drawback for this is going to be ammo storage. The video made the point that it takes a lot of massed fire for flak to be able to actually shoot down enemy aircraft, and shells take up a lot more storage space than bottles of compressed blaster gas. That's a big part of why I was excited to find a workable theory for flak turbolasers...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[RyanDarkstar]

[CRMcNeill]

I think tech has advanced enough that the Alliance would have access to flak turbolasers, as well. Mostly I see flak shells as a way to give high-tech artillery the option of engaging aerial targets. My take is that tube-launched artillery pieces in the SWU use rail, gravitic or tractor-based tech to launch shells, which allows the cannon to greatly vary muzzle velocity. This in turn allows a cannon to fire at either the relatively low muzzle velocities needed to fire ballistic artillery shots, or the much higher velocities required by use as a direct fire weapon.

The main advantages I see in modern projectile weaponry in the SWU is the ability to tailor the warhead type to a specific function (much more so than a blaster bolt, at any rate), the ability to guide / home on a target, and the ability to fire around or over intervening obstacles. The drawback is in ammo carrying capacity, as well as the fixed state of the ammo itself; blaster gas can be broken down into whatever portion is needed to load into anything from a hold-out blaster to a heavy turbolaser, whereas an artillery shell must be sized for a particular barrel diameter during assembly. The only exception would be fitting a smaller shell with a discarding sabot so that it could be fired from a larger-bore cannon.

But I digress...
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[Dr. Bidlo]

I am just stumbling on this today. The game after next that I have planned is a land battle on Mimban in 10 BBY. I will be emulating the battle scenes and feel from Solo - trench warfare, ballistic artillery, dark, muddy, wet, and up close combat at times.

However, the main thing I was going to struggle with was how to use the artillery of the AT-DT in a realistic was against troops and vehicles. Without anything else, I was going to basically go with grenade rules, but he is all this hard work and research set before me...

[CRMcNeill]

Again, glad to be of assistance. It took a long time to achieve something workable. There are a few details that never got ironed out, like artillery-delivered minefields and such, so if you have any questions, feel free to ask.
I also have several ballistic artillery vehicles and weapons scattered throughout my Index. I can compile a list, if you like.

The AT-DT is somewhat disappointing to me, in many ways. It really should've been put on the same legs as the AT-ST; per Wookieepedia, it even started that way, by putting a German Flak 88 on an AT-ST's legs. The AT-ST itself is less of a scout vehicle than it is an infantry heavy weapons platform that carries its own high ground around with it. As such, having a heavy cannon variant of the same platform to serve in the Assault Gun / Tank Destroyer role would make sense. It's just that the design failed to deliver on the coolness factor. I much prefer the AT-AP tripod walker glimpsed in RotS.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[CRMcNeill]

Hey, garhkal, a belated thought on my stats for the AT-HP. I wrote it so that the cannon couldn't be fired while the vehicle was moving, but it occurs to me that it could conceivably still be fired in the Front Arc only while moving, and only function as a Turret when stationary and the suspension locked. The idea would be that the suspension can handle the recoil along its long axis, but it has to be locked to fire to either side.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

[garhkal]

Nice work C.. And yes, when i initially made the ATHP, i invisioned it as not normally firing if moving, other than one gun forward, but when 'locked' down, after it crouches, all guns can fire as the turret swivels..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Dr. Bidlo]

I would've to see a compilation of artillery vehicles if it is not too much trouble. Do you have the AT-DT? I also agree about the legs - it looks like it would be quite unstable as a bipod with narrow feet.

Also, should this thread be moved to House Rules? I just noticed it is under Gamemastering, which is why I didn't see it before.

[Whill]