Turret Attribute. The Stryker ICV as a mount that is a RWS. To me that is not like a turret but to show that it can turn without the vehicle having to turn to fire the weapon. I must show it as a turret. My question is where can I find the height, length, width and turn speed for it. Plus what is a View Direction?
Actually, independent movement is
not a function of the turret attribute. Any weapon not marked coaxial can traverse independently of the vehicle.
The major issue with turrets or no turrets is twofold:
1. Does the assembly contain the vehicle's primary vision devices? In other words, will the vehicle be most likely to spot enemy in the direction the hull is facing, or the direction the weapon is facing?
2. Is the assembly large enough to justify separate resolution of damage? Turrets may have independent pKs, for example.
Positive answers to one or both of these questions would justify the addition of a turret. A weapon that is merely pintle-mounted would not.
In the case of Stryker ICV, the RWS
does include vision devices, and arguably that is how the vehicle commander is likely to observe the battlefield. So, yes, I'd say it should be a turret for that reason.
What is the purpose of a Hit Graphic and a Help Picture for?
I think neither works at the moment. Hit Graphic is not implemented to my knowledge, and I think Help Picture is implemented but broken.
Smoke Attribute: What are Burst Release and Number of Smoke mean?
Burst release means it issues a single smoke "cloud" and then stops until ordered to smoke again. Otherwise, it will continue emitting clouds at the rate specified by "time to release" until ordered to stop smoking or it has exhausted its supply. "Number of smoke" indicates how many clouds it can generate. "Opacity" indicates how well thermal viewers can see through it. Chemical type smoke like hexachloroethane or ammonium perchlorate is fairly transparent to thermal, but inciendary smoke like white phosphorous blocks thermals pretty well, because the smoke particles are "hot". The downside of WP is that it is usually of shorter duration than chemical smoke, the fairly modern US M825 155mm round being a notable exception thanks to its advanced design. Most vehicle grenade systems are WP.
What determines the View Range? By the equipment on the vehicle or by the naked eye?
This is largely a matter of opinion, heavily colored by game play. A number of factors are involved.
1. How many eyes are searching? Most tanks have terrible visibility, mainly because there are a very limited number of eyes able to devote to searching, and even those are frequently distracted. The gunner has great optics, but a very restricted field of view. Real world, most spotting is done by the commander, most frequently by sticking his head out the hatch and using binoculars. Targets are
identified using optics, but usually
spotted by naked eye or binocular. The exception, of course, is very poor visibility, when optics are usually your only real option, but this invariably results in greatly reduced spotting rates, even when advanced devices like thermal viewers are available.
2. A related question --- are the crew likely to be looking? For artillery pieces, for example, they tend to be focused on their crew task. So, I'd give howitzers and mortars greatly restricted view ranges, not because they
can't see farther, but because they usually just aren't paying attention. Conversely, recon units are likely to have a larger view range than their equipment might indicate, because their primary mission is to look for things, and they are carefully trained how to do it properly.
3. Game considerations. The spotting engine is a major sink for processing power. Expanding view ranges requires an exponential expansion in processor time to service it. So, in general, you want to give as many units as possible the least possible range you can justify. If they are not big "spotters", rachet them down --- why use up extra cycles needlessly?
Note that view range is not limited to the stated value. Actual view range varies based on terrain and visibility. The database value is just a "base" for the engine to determine relative spotting capability. In general, here are my recommendations:
1. Recon/radar units: 5000 meters (overrides type below).
2. Dismounts, attack helos: 3000 meters.
3. Tanks, APCs: 2500 meters.
4. Artillery, engineers, lift helos, other support: 1000 meters.
5. Fixed-wing air: 500 meters.
This is based on some playtesting. My database does not yet reflect these values, so don't be surprised.
If you are using Kbluck's database, you can use the Friendly Wheeled Infantry Piece.
No, use "wheeled mech infantry", the same as used by the BTR. Stryker is really nothing more than a fancied-up BTR, after all.
******
On a side editorial note, I am still mystified as to why the Army went to so much expense and trouble to produce an APC that has few if any advantages over a modernized version of the proven M113 design, and quite a few significant disadvantages. The only explanations I can come up with is that the Piranha chassis looks "sexier", and perhaps MOWAG has better lobbyists than FMC.
At least I know why the USMC preferred the LAV-25; it had better amphibious performance. I'm sure the Army has largely obliterated that advantage in the process of "decorating" the Stryker vehicles.
--- Kevin