Unarmored Vehicles as target

[GVL]

If a Squad Fires to an unarmored vehicle, I have to use the special row on the IFT chart for unarmored vehicles. Isn't there a modifier for the Vehicle being in motion?

 

[Larry]

When you fire at an unarmored target with IFR you use the star line on the QDRC. as for modifiers for moving, NRBH1 but not that I am aware of.

 

[Ole Boe]

No, there's no special modifier vs a moving vehicle here. This is an IFT DR, so you use normal IFT DRM as listed on the IFT DRM chart (Hindrance/TEM etc.). Note that FFMO/FFNAM is only applicable to Infantry though.

 

[GVL]

No, there's no special modifier vs a moving vehicle here. This is an IFT DR, so you use normal IFT DRM as listed on the IFT DRM chart (Hindrance/TEM etc.). Note that FFMO/FFNAM is only applicable to Infantry though.

Why isn't there a modifier? It seems easier to me to fire at a stopped vehicle than to fire at a moving vehicle.

 

[Robin Reeve]

Why isn't there a modifier?

Because there is none.

It seems easier to me to fire at a stopped vehicle than to fire at a moving vehicle

Not in ASL world, nanana... :cheeky:

 

[Dave Johnson]

Why isn't there a modifier? It seems easier to me to fire at a stopped vehicle than to fire at a moving vehicle.

That's true, and it's reflected in the Ordnance TH rules. IFT attacks are treated differently though, maybe because it's easier to put lead from a MG on a moving target than it is to put a single AP round on that same moving target. I dunno. Just one of those things that make you say "Hmmmm." :hmmm:

Dave

 

[Corporal Kindel]

Why isn't there a modifier? It seems easier to me to fire at a stopped vehicle than to fire at a moving vehicle.

There's no IFT modifier for firing at a moving vehicle for the same reason there is no modifier for firing at moving infantry .. we're talking about volume shots here from a squad or MMC (a group of men), not single large rounds fired from an AFV/GUN. And, even if it was a case of a lone SMC firing (Hero for example): a 1/+2 shot has about the same chance of success against a CE AFV as does a Gun gaining a CH, so it makes no difference.

Btw the way, there is a +2 to hit modifier for moving vehicles ... if you decide to shoot an MG as ordnance.

Actually, now that I think about it, I think that unarmored vehicles should get the same -1/-2 ffnam/ffmo modifier as Infantry, after all, why not? When they're not moving they're presumably tucked away in the best possible location (alley way, camoflauged, small groove in the earth .. just like non-moving Infantry are considered to take the prone position), and when unarmored vehicles move, just like infantry, there wallowing out in the open for everyone and their mother to see, and hear!, providing a more ample target than they would otherwise.

But then, these are reality arguments, and everyone knows reality arguments have about the same value as toilet paper.

 

[Larry]

and everyone knows reality arguments have about the same value as toilet paper.

Have you ever been in a place without toilet paper? Come on, toilet paper is a very valuable commodity. Now if you edited a word out of the comment ... then I would agree assuming we are thinking of the same word ...

:devil: :devil:

 

[Robin Reeve]

I think that unarmored vehicles should get the same -1/-2 ffnam/ffmo modifier as Infantry, after all, why not?

Because a truck doesn't need to stand up when it moves.

 

[Corporal Kindel]

Because a truck doesn't need to stand up when it moves.

but someone needs to get into it ...
turn the engine on ...
and drive away ...
thus moving in the open...

presumably the driver is not lying down on the seat while driving, after all, ASL drivers are not James Bond.

 

[Corporal Kindel]

Have you ever been in a place without toilet paper? Come on, toilet paper is a very valuable commodity. Now if you edited a word out of the comment ... then I would agree assuming we are thinking of the same word ...

:devil: :devil:

Yeah but it's only valuable if you use it to wipe your butt, and even then, only in the act of wiping.

after all, people can just use their hand, why not? cave men surely did.


And the French don't use toilet paper, they have those butt-cleaning spouts (I can't remember what they were called now).

 

[Robin Reeve]

after all, people can just use their hand, why not? cave men surely did.
And the French don't use toilet paper, they have those butt-cleaning spouts (I can't remember what they were called now).

[off topic mode on]
In the Middle East and in India, people do use their "impure hand" (i.e. the left one) ro wipe themselves.
Don't you ever try to dip your left hand in a plate when you eat : it would be considered as very rude...

The French do use toilet paper.
The "sprout" thing exists in many places, but I never saw it in French toilets.
I think it is much more frequent in Japan.
What French sometimes have are "turkish toilets", where you crouch rather than sit (and pray you don't slip an fall in the hole).
Somebody said the French improved the Turkish version adding the water spray that soaks your shoes if you are not cautious... :laugh:
[off topic mode off]

 

[Dave Johnson]

[off topic mode on]

Off topic indeed! That's way more information than I wanted. Thanks... I think.

Dave :gas: