The Absurdity of modern warfare

[Hotrod]

On the cost effectiveness of robots vs their equivalent value in power armor, it’s also worth including infantry with jet packs in the discussion. We had a lively thread a while back about the merits of jet pack infantry in cost vs capabilities and how weirdly underused they are in canon.

[Killer Cyborg]

Why does the "neural Sensor plug" have to require some type of cybernetic implant?

Details as we all know are lacking, but it could be that the helmet:
-is part of a VR system, and we know there are remote VR setups in the setting (CAN Republic on the Moon in MiO, and Triax in WB5). So instead of putting on a VR suit for remote work, the VR suit is integrated into the cockpit.
-a telemental setup (while not part of the Robot RCC in Rifts, it is a more limited version of the one to appear in HU, where this is a control option for manned models that can be produced) that has external sensors built into a helmet that connects to the 'bot. This could be how (or close to how) the "Neural Sensor Plug" works. There have been experiments to control things via brainwave monitoring that do not require implants.
-SB1 (pg61 in original version, not sure about revised) when discussing Archie-3 mentions a "special psionic helmet was developed that enabled the designers to mentally link with their artificial creation", now the ARCHIE-3 Developers had much broader goals than mere piloting, but it shows you could build a "psionic helmet" to interface with machines.

Basically I'm just trying to figure out what it "plugs" into

Maybe, just MAYBE, look at the picture....?

There's nothing said about needing any cybernetics to pilot a GB, so yeah, I don't think that's a requirement.
I assume it's the helmet itself doing the work of reading the pilot's mind/intentions/whatever without sticking anything into their actual brain, much like you say.

So the helmet on the GB body armor plugs into the helmet on the GB power armor?

The armor plugs into the helmet.
That's why the helmet has a socket on it.
You know, in the picture we're discussing.

Remember, the implication I take from VK is that Dragon Armor isn't great for giant bots because there is already (checks notes) "Conventional armor" for giant bots that is "cheaper and more efficient" than the dragon armor.

What this entails, I'm not sure. 20' tall Plastic Man designed for Enforcers?
Dunno, since it's never been statted, or even referred to again (that I know of).

I need to backtrack here, which page of Vampire Kingdoms alludes to body armor for robot vehicles?

Scroll up.
It's even easier than looking at a picture in a book.

[Killer Cyborg]

The general argument is that Giant Fighting Robots only exist in Rifts because they're Cool, and that tanks and aircraft are more practical.
That's the idea I'm arguing against, anyway.

Actually I don't think the only reason they exist in the setting is for the Coolness Factor, I do think there are roles they can and do play that a conventional vehicle can not perform, but I also think that there are roles that the Robots are pressed into for that "Coolness" Factor that a Conventional Vehicle does better.

I don't see any reason to "keep things simple."

I do though.

Cool.
Then look at this simply:
Robots have 1.5-2 defenses against the kind of ranged attack most likely to one-shot a bot or tank if not defended against successfully.
That is, quite simply, an advantage.

For a generic consideration it is best to keep things simple since as I said there is no easy way to consider the damage output of a missile attack. There is no guarantee a missile is going to be explosive. There is no guarantee that every missile launcher has the same payload or rate of fire (both factors in volley size). There is also no guarantee a missile volley will be at maximum size. Those will all vary from attacker to attacker, where guns are much simpler to consider.

There's no guarantee of anything; you play the odds.
Plasma missiles are more expensive than frag or explosive.
Frag and explosive are most commonly listed as the default missile type.

Being able to reduce damage from the most common missiles, and in fact the majority of missile types, is significant.

When you have a piece of military equipment worth millions or tens of millions of credits, keeping it from being taken out in a single attack by an enemy quite simply IS an important consideration.

I agree. However I would also argue that Rolling with Impact IS NOT the best solution if you are facing an attack of that magnitude. At that point your best chance of survival is to shoot the missiles down:
-while it consumes 1APM, so would a dodge or Roll (as of RUE in RAW)

Irrelevant; this is not an either/or issue.
You try to shoot the missile down.
If that fails, and you have time, you try to dodge (which tank's can't generally do unless on the move, IIRC).
If one or both of those fail, then you roll with impact.

Just like a car can have both a seat belt AND airbags, and the cars with both have an advantage over cars with just seat belts.

Rolling with Impact isn't something you do INSTEAD of dodging or shooting down missiles; it's something you can do to reduce damage when either or both of those fails.

-To Strike the incoming Missiles is mechanically easier (DC of 8 in RUE, DC of 4 RMB) than meet/beat the opponent's combined strike roll required for a Dodge/Roll/Parry (which is not uniform since its D20+bonuses w/min 8 Vs D20+bonuses). That means if the missiles are going to strike with an example of a combined 19 result (D20 roll + strike bonuses), I only need to roll an 8 w/strike bonuses on a D20 vs a 19 if I had to Roll. It should also apply if the Strike was with a Natural 20 Roll.

NOT exactly, no.
The penalties for shooting a moving target are (RUE 361) -1 to strike something under 20 mph, and an additional -1 to strike for every 50 mph of speed.
A high explosive missile travels at 500 mph, so you'd be at -11 to strike.
So that 8 turns into a 19, as far as I can tell, going by canon.

Worse, many missiles (like minimissiles, which IIRC are the size of a beer can ) are small.
RUE 361
"any small target is difficult to shoot, and even with an Aimed or Called shot, the shooter suffers a penalty of -3 or -4 to strike (sometimes morek depending ont he target).
And also, "Penalties are accumulative."

So that 19 turns into a 22 or 24 when dealing with minimissiles. Not sure about Short Range; I don't recall their size ever being listed.

That'll shrink a little due to strike bonuses, but if you don't have the time to make an Aimed shot, it won't likely shrink by a lot.

And when dealing with a small target like minimissiles, requiring a Called Shot wouldn't be out of line.


Anyway...

-Now damaging the incoming missiles to cause it to detonate should also be doable (this varies by platform's available weapons and missile type, you don't even need to really roll for damage to a Mini Missile arguably the most common type of missile used in Rifts), and the chance of taking out the volley from destroying one missile is pretty decent (better with a counter missile than guns), especially under RUE's revision (30% only one missile is destroyed, 30% 1/2 volley hits, 40% destroy the volley when using a gun system, Missiles are 75% chance to take out swarm, with 100% chance if you fire equal number).

Right, so what I'm seeing is that you think Roll is useless because (effectively) "sometimes you won't be able to use it."
So instead you're pushing for a defense that relies on having missiles in order to have a decent chance at being effective.

IF you hit this missile with gunfire, and IF you destroy that missile, you're looking at a 30% chance that you'll reduce the damage by one missile worth, 25% with a volley of 4 (5% with a volley of 20, etc.), opposed to a 50% damage reduction with Roll.
There's a 30% chance that shooting the missiles will take out half the volley, equaling the reduction of a successful Roll With Impact.
And a 40% chance that you'll avoid damage entirely.

Which means that there's a 60% chance with shooting at missiles using guns, that you'll be able to benefit from a Roll With Impact on top of shooting.
Say you have 4 HE minimissiles coming at you, that's 5d6x4 MD potential.
If you shoot down one missile, that's 5d6x3 MD, so you'll take 15-90 MD. If you Roll, that gets further dropped to 7-45 MD.
If you shoot down half the missiles, that's 5d6x2 MD coming at you, the equivalent of a strong railgun burst (effectively 1d6x10). Roll with impact, and that gets cut down to 5d6 MD again, which is more like a light railgun burst.

Now, IF you have a missile of your own available to fire back at the incoming missiles, sure, you have a 75% chance of detonating the entire volley.
Which still means that 1 in 4 times you'll be able to benefit from a Roll With Impact from the remaining missiles.
If Roll isn't an option because plasma missiles are incoming, that's fine; you're literally in exactly the same situation as if you didn't have the ability to Roll. It's not like the ability comes with a penalty.
All it means is that sometimes, in some situations, robots will be as lightly protected as tanks when it comes to missile defense, and in others they'll have additional protection that tanks lack.

-Missile Volley Size can also limit your options, you can't dodge a volley of 4 or more (which would put a 'bot in the same boat as vehicle in terms of being able to dodge, so it wouldn't matter if you where in a Tank or 'Bot).

That applies only to LRMs as of RUE, and even then only certain LRMs.

BUT ALSO no, your bot isn't in the same position as a tank.
A tank that can't dodge, cannot roll to reduce damage. It can shoot at missiles, and that's it.
A Bot that cannot dodge missiles can still Block Sacrifice, using its arms to take the hit instead of its main body.
And it can Roll with impact to reduce the damage to its arms or (if block sacrifice fails) main body.

The only situation in which a robot is as defenseless as a tank against missiles is:
-if the robot can't dodge.
-if the robot can't use its arms
-AND if the robot is being targeted by plasma missiles (or maybe Armor Piercing).

In every specific case I'm aware of, the standard complement is Explosives, not Plasma or Armor Piercing.
Or at least in the vast majority of cases.

Megaversally speaking, 1E RT had Plasma Mini Missiles and Non-Plasma Mini Missiles as requiring specific launchers based on Plasma or Non-plasma. (IINM 2E omits this).

Now Limited to just Rifts, I have to disagree with you. I reviewed the Missiles used by various platforms in CWC/Japan/Traix(#1)/RUE, there really isn't a single "standard" warhead type for all types of missiles, some even list multiple options (some even just list "heavy") or even contradictory ones to your experience (CWC pretty much has Frag as the standard Mini Missile, but the others also had examples of option for AP or Plasma as typical).

Again, plasma costs more, and it's less effective or even ineffective against any targets with magical heat/fire protection.
And when a default is listed, it's explosive or frag the vast majority of the time, if not universally.

I never said there was a single standard; I said that when there IS a standard, it's not plasma or AP in any case I'm aware of.

The missile damage types are:
1. Light Explosive
2. Heavy Explosive
3. Fragmentation
4. Armor Piercing
5. Plasma/Napalm
6. Nuclear
7. Proton Torpedo

Of these 7 types, 5 are subject to Roll With Impact as far as I can tell.
Discounting Roll because there will be SOME times when it doesn't work is not a valid argument; that is true of every defense. Sometimes the dice won't be with you. Sometimes somebody will shoot your Glitter Boy with a plasma, ion, particle beam, missile, or railgun instead of a laser. Sometimes your burster will get hit by a non-plasma weapon. Sometimes you won't be able to cast Armor of Ithan in time.
But that doesn't mean the defense is useless, or not worth having, and it doesn't mean that having that damage-reducing potential is NOT an advantage.

[Killer Cyborg]

On the cost effectiveness of robots vs their equivalent value in power armor, it’s also worth including infantry with jet packs in the discussion. We had a lively thread a while back about the merits of jet pack infantry in cost vs capabilities and how weirdly underused they are in canon.

I agree that jetpack infantry are awesome, and generally the way to go cost-wise.
The main advantage robots or any large-scale vehicle actually offers other than intimidation value, is simply that they're a platform for launching missiles. Their MDC isn't usually very impressive, and my number one rule for engagement with any big war machine in Rifts would be "do not get shot, because your armor won't protect you much."
(granted, that's always my rule for Rifts, for everybody)

The main reason why I'm even in this conversation was because the absurdity of the "robots are worse than tanks, because they can be easily taken out by pit traps (unlike tanks, apparently?)" arguments people were making.
And I stayed to point out that robots DO have some advantages in Rifts over tanks.

But that doesn't mean robots are the way to go all or most of the time.

When people have posted "how would you defend this town on x budget" type scenarios in the forums, I've never blown the budget on a robot or a tank!
One of the things I think is both really cool and really ignored by players is the fact that every soldier in EBA with a MD rifle is effectively an Armored Unit.
Infantry are usually the cheapest way to get the most firepower, and to have the best defense.

Heck, even outside of Rifts, back when I played Axis & Allies regularly, THE number one way I found for Russia to avoid being taken over by Germany and/or Japan was always to just spam out masses of infantry.
The big toys are fun, and can be strategically invaluable, but it's infantry that does the real work.

[Nekira Sudacne]

A tank that can't dodge, cannot roll to reduce damage. It can shoot at missiles, and that's it.
A Bot that cannot dodge missiles can still Block Sacrifice, using its arms to take the hit instead of its main body.

Where do you get a tank cannot dodge from? I don't recall seeing any rules that they can't dodge.

The fact that Robots and Power Armor generally get a bonus to dodge, does not mean that tanks or other vehicles lack this ability.

[Killer Cyborg]

A tank that can't dodge, cannot roll to reduce damage. It can shoot at missiles, and that's it.
A Bot that cannot dodge missiles can still Block Sacrifice, using its arms to take the hit instead of its main body.

Where do you get a tank cannot dodge from? I don't recall seeing any rules that they can't dodge.

The fact that Robots and Power Armor generally get a bonus to dodge, does not mean that tanks or other vehicles lack this ability.

Juicer Uprising 35
Phaeton Juicers
+1 to strike and dodge when piloting any vehicle, +2 to dodge in the air, and can dodge even if piloting a vehicle that does not normally have a dodge, such as a tank! However, the vehicle must have a minimum speed of 60 mph.


Now, when I GM, I tend to let tanks dodge in certain circumstances. Like if there's a really slow-moving incoming attack that a tank could reasonably drive out of the way of, or if the tank is already moving and another vehicle of comparable speed tries to ram it or something.

But also, even in situations when they can dodge...
HU2 85
...vehicles have absolutely no bonus to dodge against firearms...
and
When someone is attempting to cut-off, ram or sideswipe the vehicle, than a Dodge roll is possible. A vehicle making a dodge can't do anything else in that melee round.

I'd generally consider incoming missiles to be "firearms" in this context.

So if somebody fires a missile at a tank from normal ranged combat distances, I don't really see a way for the tank to dodge going by the rules.
Even if it CAN dodge due to some pretty specific circumstances and GM decision to override canon, they don't get any dodge bonuses.

(Tanks piloted by Phaeton Juicers are the exception, of course. But that doesn't come up commonly enough to stand out in an argument about general utility of tanks vs robots.
I mean, if we want to put a Phaeton Juicer in a tank vs a Phaeton Juicer in a giant robot, I know where my money will be, all else being roughly equal.)

[ShadowLogan]

There's no guarantee of anything; you play the odds.

I agree, however the odds in this case favor guns as the more likely weapon to be encountered. There are over x800 assorted missile systems in the game, just in lasers there are over x845 weapon systems in the game (factor in other types like Rail Guns, Particle Beams, Ion Weapons, Plasma Weapons, etc which would be another ~1,600 examples between them) and a missile attack is not the most likely to be encountered it will be a non-missile weapon (~75% of the time, now that is casting a wide net but it is reasonable for a generic scenario).

I describe the numbers as over, because I have an incomplete Rifts Library. Nor do these numbers make a distinction between man-portable and vehicle systems, though grenades are considered separate from missiles (missiles include Cruise and Torpedo). And I do maintain a DB for mark-up sheets that is pretty complete form available books.

Plasma missiles are more expensive than frag or explosive

They also have difference in various performance metrics, all of which IMHO makes it unlikely that a good representation of the value may not be present if you only consider cost. At a damage level, a HE Mini Missile does 1/2 the damage of a Plasma Missile for 1/2 the cost for example (SB1o).

Irrelevant; this is not an either/or issue.

Actually it is. If the Roll mechanic now consume an action/attack to perform, when under an attack you are going to look at what gives you the best chance to survive the missile attack by spending that one action: Dodge (no damage), Shoot Down (varying level of damage reduction), Roll (1/2 damage). Rolling while an option, no longer seems to make any sense to do for that 1APM when you could just dodge negating damage all together.

If that fails, and you have time, you try to dodge (which tank's can't generally do unless on the move, IIRC).

Given Missiles speeds and range to target, if you attempt to shoot a missile down with guns (or mini-missiles) and fail you arguably don't have time for a 2nd action (missiles cover 1,000ft typically in ~1sec, some even faster, yes I did the math). Now someone with a high APM count (order of near 15) this wouldn't apply to, but most of the time characters (PC or NPC) aren't going to be in this neighborhood.

If one or both of those fail, then you roll with impact.

That would be a house rule then since you have to have some actual time to continue to react. Speed of a missile (especially mini) means you only really get 1APM to do anything because by the time it comes around to you again, it's probably already to late. (Yes I realize you can spend actions out of order)

NOT exactly, no.
The penalties for shooting a moving target are (RUE 361) -1 to strike something under 20 mph, and an additional -1 to strike for every 50 mph of speed.
A high explosive missile travels at 500 mph, so you'd be at -11 to strike.
So that 8 turns into a 19, as far as I can tell, going by canon.

That assumes speed based penalties to strike also apply for mechanized combat (vehicle/'bot), I can certainly see that apply to Infantry, but not mecha. Case in point the combat example in RMB (involving the Enforcer and Samas) omits any use of speed penalties, though they are in the book in an odd place (SDC guns section). Nor are we reminded to apply those penalties when shooting down missiles, which would be a good place to reinforce that those apply here.

That applies only to LRMs as of RUE, and even then only certain LRMs.

Not exactly true (RUE pg364, Missile Strikes). What has changed between RUE and RMB is that RUE no longer uses a flat generic bonus, but rather moves it to the launch platform to provide a bonus if it is different than the flat generic +3/+5 type. So really any thing that can provide a bonus to strike in ranged combat ('bot, PA, tank, borg, other vehicle, etc) unless specified to a specific system could be taken as indicating the missile is guided.

Again, plasma costs more, and it's less effective or even ineffective against any targets with magical heat/fire protection.

If we're going to consider protective resistances, resistances DO extend beyond just the heat/fire protection (energy, laser, and even Kinetic exist). Though presumably if you are expecting to deal with someone that has resistances to certain attacks you would look to use weapon options that circumvent the resistance.

[Killer Cyborg]

There's no guarantee of anything; you play the odds.

I agree, however the odds in this case favor guns as the more likely weapon to be encountered. There are over x800 assorted missile systems in the game, just in lasers there are over x845 weapon systems in the game (factor in other types like Rail Guns, Particle Beams, Ion Weapons, Plasma Weapons, etc which would be another ~1,600 examples between them) and a missile attack is not the most likely to be encountered it will be a non-missile weapon (~75% of the time, now that is casting a wide net but it is reasonable for a generic scenario).

Mosquito bites are more common than bear bites, but that doesn't mean that a hiker who carries both bug spray and bear spray does NOT have an advantage over a hiker with only bug spray.

I describe the numbers as over, because I have an incomplete Rifts Library. Nor do these numbers make a distinction between man-portable and vehicle systems, though grenades are considered separate from missiles (missiles include Cruise and Torpedo). And I do maintain a DB for mark-up sheets that is pretty complete form available books.

I appreciate your thoroughness.

Plasma missiles are more expensive than frag or explosive

They also have difference in various performance metrics, all of which IMHO makes it unlikely that a good representation of the value may not be present if you only consider cost. At a damage level, a HE Mini Missile does 1/2 the damage of a Plasma Missile for 1/2 the cost for example (SB1o).

Then it becomes about whether it's more important to fire at multiple targets, or to kill a lower number of targets.
If you're mostly going a large number of lightly armored and SDC targets, for example, HE gives you 2x the number of kills (very roughly speaking) for the same price.
But against a lower number of heavily armored targets, plasma would be the way to go.

Irrelevant; this is not an either/or issue.

Actually it is. If the Roll mechanic now consume an action/attack to perform, when under an attack you are going to look at what gives you the best chance to survive the missile attack by spending that one action: Dodge (no damage), Shoot Down (varying level of damage reduction), Roll (1/2 damage). Rolling while an option, no longer seems to make any sense to do for that 1APM when you could just dodge negating damage all together. [/quote]

RUE 340-341
Step 3: Defender May Parry, Dodge or Entangle
Step 4: Attacker Rolls Damage
Step 5: Defender May Attempt to Roll With Impact

Rolling With Impact isn't on the same level as parry/dodge/entangle, where you must choose only one; it's its own thing, and does not hinge on whether or not you previously tried to parry, dodge, or entangle an incoming attack.
After damage is rolled, "If the attack is a physical impact like... a explosion... the defender can attempt to roll with the impact."
No caveats for "unless the defender previously spent an attack attempting a parry, dodge, or entangle.
Note that this is in RUE, and Step 5 lists specifically that Rolling with impact counts as one melee attack/action, yet there is still no such caveat about having not being able to Roll if you've already spent one attack on a Dodge/Parry/Entangle.

Also on RUE 341
Option to parry (or dodge) in hand to hand combat. If successfully parried, no damage is inflicted and the defender readiest himself to counter-strike. If the parry fails and the character takes damage, he may opt to roll with impact, but to do so will count as one of his melee actions/attacks.

Note the following:
-Linguistically, the parenthetical reference to dodging in the first sentence indicates that while the rest of the paragraph may use the word "parry," it's also talking about dodge, and the same rules apply.
-There is no mention of losing the option to Roll if one spends an attack on an unsuccessful Parry attemptl

RUE 363
Under Dodging Missiles:

A successful missile dodge will get the character out of the missile's direct line of impact (maximum damage). HOWEVER, the character must run or dive out of the missile's blast radius to completely escape taking any MD whatsover. That may require flying, running, or diving some distance (anywhere from 3 to 90 feet depending on the missile) to get completely out of the blast radius. The Game Master should use discretion as to whether that may require a second dodge roll or count as one roll but two melee actions.

Using up an attack on a defense does NOT inherently mean that you cannot then use another attack on defense against the same attack.
You can dodge twice against one missile, using two attacks; once against the direct impact, and once against the blast radius.
So there's no reason I can see to believe that using up one dodge to get out of the way of the main blast would mean that one could not likewise Roll With Impact to reduce the damage of the blast radius (although that would be less potentially useful than using a second dodge, if you're in an enclosed area where escaping the blast radius is impossible, Rolling would be your only real option for dealing with the radius.
And by that same token, there's nothing I'm aware of saying that one cannot, after failing to dodge the direct hit from a missile, then go on to use another attack to Roll With Impact against the explosion.

The idea that (paraphrased) "if you use one attack/action on defense, that means you cannot use another attack/action against the same defense" does not seem to have any validity within the actual rules of the game.

So why can't a person who fails a dodge roll against getting shot or stabbed, then go on to attempt another dodge against the same attack? Or attempt to parry it? Or attempt to entangle it?
Because Step 3 of the combat rules only allows for one attempt:
Any time an attacker rolls a successful strike to hit, the defender can choose to parry, dodge, or entangle.

The attacker rolls one strike.
You get to choose one of the above options, once, not multiple options in any combination.
Since Roll With Impact is a different step and is not listed, it is not restricted by whether or not you choose to parry/dodge/entangle.
Parry/Dodge/Entangle are options that occur before damage is rolled.
Roll is an option that occurs after damage is rolled.
They don't conflict with each other.

If that fails, and you have time, you try to dodge (which tank's can't generally do unless on the move, IIRC).

Given Missiles speeds and range to target, if you attempt to shoot a missile down with guns (or mini-missiles) and fail you arguably don't have time for a 2nd action (missiles cover 1,000ft typically in ~1sec, some even faster, yes I did the math). Now someone with a high APM count (order of near 15) this wouldn't apply to, but most of the time characters (PC or NPC) aren't going to be in this neighborhood.[/quote]

If you have time to dodge both a missile AND the blast radius with two separate dodge rolls, then I don't see why you wouldn't have time to dodge, then roll, or even to shoot, dodge, then roll.

It's not about time, so much as it's a matter of whether you have enough attacks.

If one or both of those fail, then you roll with impact.

That would be a house rule then since you have to have some actual time to continue to react.

Can you give me the book and page number for the canon rule that states "you have to have some actual time to continue to react?"

NOT exactly, no.
The penalties for shooting a moving target are (RUE 361) -1 to strike something under 20 mph, and an additional -1 to strike for every 50 mph of speed.
A high explosive missile travels at 500 mph, so you'd be at -11 to strike.
So that 8 turns into a 19, as far as I can tell, going by canon.

That assumes speed based penalties to strike also apply for mechanized combat (vehicle/'bot), I can certainly see that apply to Infantry, but not mecha. Case in point the combat example in RMB (involving the Enforcer and Samas) omits any use of speed penalties, though they are in the book in an odd place (SDC guns section). Nor are we reminded to apply those penalties when shooting down missiles, which would be a good place to reinforce that those apply here.

Hm. Interesting point!
However in this example all we're told is that a roll of 14 is sufficient to hit the missiles, and the penalty in the RMB for fast moving targets more than 40mph is a flat -6 to strike.
Since ranged weapons only required a 4 to strike at the time, a roll of 10 or better would suffice to hit the missile.
So while it would indeed be a handy place to discuss the speed-related strike penalties for shooting missiles, the lack of such discussion doesn't necessarily mean anything; it wasn't directly relevant because the strike roll would hit the missile in spite of such penalties.

Meanwhile, as I looked over the RMB combat section to read this example, I stumbled onto this:
RMB 41
To Roll With A Punch, Fall, or Impact
This is a saving throw of sorts, or a second dodge, to minimize damage. Players of HU will already be familiar with this hand to hand combat rule. In this case, if the player fails his dodge roll and is about to be hit by a missile(s), he has a sort of second dodge or saving throw, where the character tries not to resist the explosive impact and rolls with it.

Sure, I don't think Roll took up an attack/action when the RMB was written, but it demonstrates how Roll is supposed to work, as a kind of second dodge if the first one fails.
The only thing that's changed is that if you Dodge, fail, and Roll with Impact, you now use 2 attacks on defense instead of just one, NOT that your "sort of second dodge" can no longer be attempted at all.

That applies only to LRMs as of RUE, and even then only certain LRMs.

Not exactly true (RUE pg364, Missile Strikes). What has changed between RUE and RMB is that RUE no longer uses a flat generic bonus, but rather moves it to the launch platform to provide a bonus if it is different than the flat generic +3/+5 type. So really any thing that can provide a bonus to strike in ranged combat ('bot, PA, tank, borg, other vehicle, etc) unless specified to a specific system could be taken as indicating the missile is guided.[/quote]

Yes, RUE 364, under Missile Strikes:
Unless indicated otherwise in a specific weapon, robot, vehicle or launcher description, mini-missiles and most types of missiles are NOT guided...
and
Except for multi-warhead and long-range missiles (both rare), most missiles on Rifts Earth are NOT guided.

Now look at the part on Missile Volleys:
...a character can dodge one, two, and even three guided missiles... however it is impossible to dodge a volley of four or more...

Unless the missile is a LRM, multi-warhead, or specifically specified to be a guided missile, it is NOT a guided missile.
The rule for not being able to dodge 4+ missiles only applies to guided missiles.
Ergo, the rule for not being able to dodge 4+ missiles only applies to LRMs, multi-warheads, or missiles/launchers that specify that they are using guided missiles.

Again, plasma costs more, and it's less effective or even ineffective against any targets with magical heat/fire protection.

If we're going to consider protective resistances, resistances DO extend beyond just the heat/fire protection (energy, laser, and even Kinetic exist). Though presumably if you are expecting to deal with someone that has resistances to certain attacks you would look to use weapon options that circumvent the resistance.[/quote]

Sure, protection against kinetic exists.
But it's not as common as protection against fire/heat, unless I suppose you want to count Roll With Impact.

With the CS foes including mages (who have a wide variety of potential spells protecting themselves and/or others from heat/fire), psychics (who have a wide variety of potential powers protecting themselves and/or others from heat/fire), and supernatural critters (who often have special protection against heat/fire), I'd expect Plasma to not be the go-to standard for most situations.
As a player, I certainly avoid plasma missiles for this reason.

I do agree that there are plenty of cases where plasma would be the way to go. When the CS faced off with Free Quebec, they knew there wouldn't be dragons, mages, or elementals on the other side, so plasma was better way to go.
And there would be plenty of assignments where plasma would be the best choice for similar reasons.
BUT for a daily "we don't know what we might run into" patrol mission?
I'd go with Armor Piercing over plasma, or frag, or HE.

OR, if possible, I'd at the most put plasma in one specific kind of launcher, and other types in the other launchers, if the vehicle does in fact have multiple launchers.
(Really, even with one launcher, I don't see much reason to not mix things up a bit in Rifts: a volley of 4 missiles that included 1 AP, 1 Plasma, 1 HE, and 1 Frag, for example, would average out pretty darn well. It'd just be a pain for the GM and players to do the math on sometimes.)

[ShadowLogan]

Then it becomes about whether it's more important to fire at multiple targets, or to kill a lower number of targets.
If you're mostly going a large number of lightly armored and SDC targets, for example, HE gives you 2x the number of kills (very roughly speaking) for the same price.
But against a lower number of heavily armored targets, plasma would be the way to go.

Actually no, ignoring things like cover. That Plasma Mini-Missile will explode for x2 the damage and x3 the blast radius of the HE Mini-Missile (Frag has the highest radius for Mini-Missile, this is also true for some other categories of missile, though there are examples of being equal). That means one could potentially catch more multiple targets in the blast radius with a Plasma than a HE. Which could mean you would actually have to fire fewer Plasma Mini-Missiles vs HE Mini-Missiles to engage multiple lightly armored/SDC targets if blast radius is taken into consideration.

If you have time to dodge both a missile AND the blast radius with two separate dodge rolls, then I don't see why you wouldn't have time to dodge, then roll, or even to shoot, dodge, then roll.

This is a thorny issue here. When you dodge, you obviously did not get struck by the missile, but the question has to be considered how that is played out in terms of movement of both the missiles (where they now land) and where you moved to in the dodge. Neither really get addressed and are left to the GM discretion, so you might not even need to make a second attempt.

I also point you to point #2 of Shooting Missiles (pg364 of RUE, also in RMB) that state "This means the character has only one or two melee attacks (G.M. discretion) to shoot at one or two missiles within the volley." This to me equates to you only have time for one action/attack unless your APM time is extremely short and the missile was fired from extreme range of the gun you counterattack with (if both the defender and shooter both use non-Mini-Missiles it gets a lot more complicated since you could in theory have more time to react than 1-2 attacks).

Can you give me the book and page number for the canon rule that states "you have to have some actual time to continue to react?"

I'd point to point #1 on pg364 of RUE under Shooting Missiles. "If all the attacks for that melee round have already been used up, the character is out of luck and can't shoot at the incoming missile(s)". Which is also found in RMB's rules. So, you need APM/time remaining in the round to react if your action consumes an APM, it might be in the best location, but it is there and makes sense in terms of broader use. And while pg342 of RUE (2nd Paragraph, left column) allows you to spend actions in the next melee to dodge, it doesn't say anything about RwI. I will also state I find this bit on pg342 as a mess.

Hm. Interesting point!
However in this example all we're told is that a roll of 14 is sufficient to hit the missiles, and the penalty in the RMB for fast moving targets more than 40mph is a flat -6 to strike.
Since ranged weapons only required a 4 to strike at the time, a roll of 10 or better would suffice to hit the missile.
So while it would indeed be a handy place to discuss the speed-related strike penalties for shooting missiles, the lack of such discussion doesn't necessarily mean anything; it wasn't directly relevant because the strike roll would hit the missile in spite of such penalties.

I agree they only give the resulting rolls, but it would make sense to cite any penalties in play since they do call out bonuses since this example is supposed to show how the system works. The lack of penalties here IMHO is telling in when they don't get applied. And as I said, the location of the penalties in question also is oddly placed (it's the same in 1E RT's main book) suggesting that it actually applies only out-side of mecha combat.

Yes, RUE 364, under Missile Strikes:
Unless indicated otherwise in a specific weapon, robot, vehicle or launcher description, mini-missiles and most types of missiles are NOT guided...
and
Except for multi-warhead and long-range missiles (both rare), most missiles on Rifts Earth are NOT guided.

IMHO if a platform (mecha/vehicle/man-portable) has a bonus to strike in ranged combat (generic), then for missiles it means the missile has to be guided. That means every Power Armor (and Robots) would be sporting guided missiles due to the Laser Targeting System ("+1 strike when using long-range weapons. Does not apply to hand to hand combat or SAMAS", not sure why the SAMAS is called out*)

*

Spoiler:

This might have to do with the technical difference between "Missile" and "Rocket", a missile has a guidance system, but a rocket does not. The SAMAS specifically identifies it as a Rocket system, so does the Flying Titan and Samson PA in RUE/RMB.

If we accept the technical difference between a "Missile" and "Rocket", then really anytime a system is said to use a missile it is automatically guided. For it to be Unguided it has to specifically state it's a rocket.

Source:
https://www.britannica.com/technology/missile

[narcissus]

Does not apply to hand to hand combat or SAMAS", not sure why the SAMAS is called out*

It's because in RMB the SAMAS had +2 to strike long range. They "forgot" that part in RUE, but didn't edit out the "Does not apply to SAMAS" bit. So either SAMAS use the +2 from RMB, or ignore the "or SAMAS" and just give them a +1 like everyone else. The intent was definitely not to make them worse than every other power armor.

[guardiandashi]

Then it becomes about whether it's more important to fire at multiple targets, or to kill a lower number of targets.
If you're mostly going a large number of lightly armored and SDC targets, for example, HE gives you 2x the number of kills (very roughly speaking) for the same price.
But against a lower number of heavily armored targets, plasma would be the way to go.

Actually no, ignoring things like cover. That Plasma Mini-Missile will explode for x2 the damage and x3 the blast radius of the HE Mini-Missile (Frag has the highest radius for Mini-Missile, this is also true for some other categories of missile, though there are examples of being equal). That means one could potentially catch more multiple targets in the blast radius with a Plasma than a HE. Which could mean you would actually have to fire fewer Plasma Mini-Missiles vs HE Mini-Missiles to engage multiple lightly armored/SDC targets if blast radius is taken into consideration.

If you have time to dodge both a missile AND the blast radius with two separate dodge rolls, then I don't see why you wouldn't have time to dodge, then roll, or even to shoot, dodge, then roll.

This is a thorny issue here. When you dodge, you obviously did not get struck by the missile, but the question has to be considered how that is played out in terms of movement of both the missiles (where they now land) and where you moved to in the dodge. Neither really get addressed and are left to the GM discretion, so you might not even need to make a second attempt.

I also point you to point #2 of Shooting Missiles (pg364 of RUE, also in RMB) that state "This means the character has only one or two melee attacks (G.M. discretion) to shoot at one or two missiles within the volley." This to me equates to you only have time for one action/attack unless your APM time is extremely short and the missile was fired from extreme range of the gun you counterattack with (if both the defender and shooter both use non-Mini-Missiles it gets a lot more complicated since you could in theory have more time to react than 1-2 attacks).

Can you give me the book and page number for the canon rule that states "you have to have some actual time to continue to react?"

I'd point to point #1 on pg364 of RUE under Shooting Missiles. "If all the attacks for that melee round have already been used up, the character is out of luck and can't shoot at the incoming missile(s)". Which is also found in RMB's rules. So, you need APM/time remaining in the round to react if your action consumes an APM, it might be in the best location, but it is there and makes sense in terms of broader use. And while pg342 of RUE (2nd Paragraph, left column) allows you to spend actions in the next melee to dodge, it doesn't say anything about RwI. I will also state I find this bit on pg342 as a mess.

Hm. Interesting point!
However in this example all we're told is that a roll of 14 is sufficient to hit the missiles, and the penalty in the RMB for fast moving targets more than 40mph is a flat -6 to strike.
Since ranged weapons only required a 4 to strike at the time, a roll of 10 or better would suffice to hit the missile.
So while it would indeed be a handy place to discuss the speed-related strike penalties for shooting missiles, the lack of such discussion doesn't necessarily mean anything; it wasn't directly relevant because the strike roll would hit the missile in spite of such penalties.

I agree they only give the resulting rolls, but it would make sense to cite any penalties in play since they do call out bonuses since this example is supposed to show how the system works. The lack of penalties here IMHO is telling in when they don't get applied. And as I said, the location of the penalties in question also is oddly placed (it's the same in 1E RT's main book) suggesting that it actually applies only out-side of mecha combat.

Yes, RUE 364, under Missile Strikes:
Unless indicated otherwise in a specific weapon, robot, vehicle or launcher description, mini-missiles and most types of missiles are NOT guided...
and
Except for multi-warhead and long-range missiles (both rare), most missiles on Rifts Earth are NOT guided.

IMHO if a platform (mecha/vehicle/man-portable) has a bonus to strike in ranged combat (generic), then for missiles it means the missile has to be guided. That means every Power Armor (and Robots) would be sporting guided missiles due to the Laser Targeting System ("+1 strike when using long-range weapons. Does not apply to hand to hand combat or SAMAS", not sure why the SAMAS is called out*)

*

Spoiler:

This might have to do with the technical difference between "Missile" and "Rocket", a missile has a guidance system, but a rocket does not. The SAMAS specifically identifies it as a Rocket system, so does the Flying Titan and Samson PA in RUE/RMB.

If we accept the technical difference between a "Missile" and "Rocket", then really anytime a system is said to use a missile it is automatically guided. For it to be Unguided it has to specifically state it's a rocket.

Source:
https://www.britannica.com/technology/missile

I kind of agree and disagree with the change of missiles in RUE

my interpretation (besides noting that I don't think the writers really understand what they are talking about ) is that in RUE they basically went from fully autonomous guided missiles to essentially "semi guided" missiles, and then claim that they are unguided.
to clarify, I am going to sort weapons (missiles and rockets) into 3 categories:
fully guided the old standard "guided" missiles basically they have sensors and a "smart" guidance computer that gets a +3 or +5 bonus to strike and are "fire and forget" weapons once they are in flight (launched) the only real interaction with friendly units might be sending destruct codes, otherwise they go out and try to hit their target or best match if they can retarget if they miss.

semi-guided these are really missiles that are similar to modern assisted guidance missiles (think wire guided, laser designated or similar, a perfect example being the movie top gun: maverick the bombs that they are using on the target, where the second plane is "designating" the target and the bombs are homing on said designated target. these also might be similar to preprogramed missiles that are similar to what most people think of cruise missiles or other long range missiles and ICBMS which have a preprogrammed flight plan IE go to "coordinates" and then hit location X )

the third kind are totally unguided, best represented today as rockets or rocket pods: they basically just fly in a straight line and explode when they hit something or otherwise trigger their attack (proximity fused warheads that get close enough to something "solid" to set them off.

[Killer Cyborg]

RUE 340-341
Step 3: Defender May Parry, Dodge or Entangle
Step 4: Attacker Rolls Damage
Step 5: Defender May Attempt to Roll With Impact

Rolling With Impact isn't on the same level as parry/dodge/entangle, where you must choose only one; it's its own thing, and does not hinge on whether or not you previously tried to parry, dodge, or entangle an incoming attack.
After damage is rolled, "If the attack is a physical impact like... a explosion... the defender can attempt to roll with the impact."
No caveats for "unless the defender previously spent an attack attempting a parry, dodge, or entangle.
Note that this is in RUE, and Step 5 lists specifically that Rolling with impact counts as one melee attack/action, yet there is still no such caveat about having not being able to Roll if you've already spent one attack on a Dodge/Parry/Entangle.

The only thing I dislike about this order is it allows a bit of meta-gaming where someone can first see how much damage something does prior to deciding if it's worth investing a melee action in reducing it.

IE maybe if the 1D6x10 punch does 60 dmg you'd RWB but if it only did 10 dmg then you might opt to avoid the RWB and stay on the offense.

It seems like maybe rolling with impact ought to be done after parry/dodge but prior to damage to avoid this potential metagaming.

IIRC (I'm away from my books, so I can't triple-check), you only decide whether or parry/dodge/entangle AFTER a successful strike roll is made.
Which is the same kind of thing; in real life, if somebody points a gun at you, you have to dodge BEFORE you know whether or not they'll hit you.

So yeah, from a simulationist point of view, there are problems here.
But from a gaming view, I consider it a feature, not a bug. Both cases help you avoid wasting attacks unnecessarily on defense.

[Killer Cyborg]

Then it becomes about whether it's more important to fire at multiple targets, or to kill a lower number of targets.
If you're mostly going a large number of lightly armored and SDC targets, for example, HE gives you 2x the number of kills (very roughly speaking) for the same price.
But against a lower number of heavily armored targets, plasma would be the way to go.

Actually no, ignoring things like cover. That Plasma Mini-Missile will explode for x2 the damage and x3 the blast radius of the HE Mini-Missile (Frag has the highest radius for Mini-Missile, this is also true for some other categories of missile, though there are examples of being equal). That means one could potentially catch more multiple targets in the blast radius with a Plasma than a HE. Which could mean you would actually have to fire fewer Plasma Mini-Missiles vs HE Mini-Missiles to engage multiple lightly armored/SDC targets if blast radius is taken into consideration.

Hm.
I'm away from my books right now, so I can't check, but when I looked the other day I thought Plasma and HE had the same blast radius.
And part of my point is that X2 damage is a waste, when x1 will do the job for the same price.

If you have time to dodge both a missile AND the blast radius with two separate dodge rolls, then I don't see why you wouldn't have time to dodge, then roll, or even to shoot, dodge, then roll.

This is a thorny issue here. When you dodge, you obviously did not get struck by the missile, but the question has to be considered how that is played out in terms of movement of both the missiles (where they now land) and where you moved to in the dodge. Neither really get addressed and are left to the GM discretion, so you might not even need to make a second attempt.

You might not need to, but when you can, you CAN.
There's nothing inherent about timing that prevents you from using two dodges in one round of "attacks".
The only factor seems to be the blast radius. If it's a BIG blast radius, then you can make two dodges to get out of it.
If not, then you don't need to.

I also point you to point #2 of Shooting Missiles (pg364 of RUE, also in RMB) that state "This means the character has only one or two melee attacks (G.M. discretion) to shoot at one or two missiles within the volley." This to me equates to you only have time for one action/attack unless your APM time is extremely short and the missile was fired from extreme range of the gun you counterattack with (if both the defender and shooter both use non-Mini-Missiles it gets a lot more complicated since you could in theory have more time to react than 1-2 attacks).

I agree that time is a factor of some sort when you're trying to shoot at incoming missiles.
Which isn't the same as trying to dodge/parry/defend.

The only way I can really see this working in-game, actual play, would be that if a missile is going to take 2 attacks worth of time to reach you, you get two chances to shoot it. If it only takes one attack worth of time, you only have 1 shot.
So if Missile Man is way back, and fires a missile at you, you could fire immediately after his attack, spending your next attack as if you were dodging, then on your next attack that comes up, you can try again.
If that makes sense.

But it's not the same issue as dodging and rolling in a single attack's worth of time, which we know is possible due to the RMB passage stating so that I posted earlier.

Can you give me the book and page number for the canon rule that states "you have to have some actual time to continue to react?"

I'd point to point #1 on pg364 of RUE under Shooting Missiles. "If all the attacks for that melee round have already been used up, the character is out of luck and can't shoot at the incoming missile(s)". Which is also found in RMB's rules. So, you need APM/time remaining in the round to react if your action consumes an APM, it might be in the best location, but it is there and makes sense in terms of broader use. And while pg342 of RUE (2nd Paragraph, left column) allows you to spend actions in the next melee to dodge, it doesn't say anything about RwI. I will also state I find this bit on pg342 as a mess.

The translation of that to dodging/rolling would be:
"If you use your last attack of the melee round dodging the missile, then you won't have any attacks left to Roll."

It's not really about TIME; it's about how many attacks you have.

A character with auto-dodge doesn't take more time to dodge; he simply takes fewer (0) attacks to dodge.

Same deal with Roll With Impact.
It used to be a free action; everybody effectively has Auto-Roll (if they could Roll at all).
Now it costs an attack, but that doesn't mean it takes any more time.
All it means is that if you're out of attacks, you're out of luck.

Hm. Interesting point!
However in this example all we're told is that a roll of 14 is sufficient to hit the missiles, and the penalty in the RMB for fast moving targets more than 40mph is a flat -6 to strike.
Since ranged weapons only required a 4 to strike at the time, a roll of 10 or better would suffice to hit the missile.
So while it would indeed be a handy place to discuss the speed-related strike penalties for shooting missiles, the lack of such discussion doesn't necessarily mean anything; it wasn't directly relevant because the strike roll would hit the missile in spite of such penalties.

I agree they only give the resulting rolls, but it would make sense to cite any penalties in play since they do call out bonuses since this example is supposed to show how the system works. The lack of penalties here IMHO is telling in when they don't get applied. And as I said, the location of the penalties in question also is oddly placed (it's the same in 1E RT's main book) suggesting that it actually applies only out-side of mecha combat.

I don't have my book right now to look, but do they talk about any combat bonuses in that combat?
I just recall them giving the total, 14, not talking about how much of that was strike bonus.

If I remember correctly, I'd say they likely just weren't going into that level of detail.

Yes, RUE 364, under Missile Strikes:
Unless indicated otherwise in a specific weapon, robot, vehicle or launcher description, mini-missiles and most types of missiles are NOT guided...
and
Except for multi-warhead and long-range missiles (both rare), most missiles on Rifts Earth are NOT guided.

IMHO if a platform (mecha/vehicle/man-portable) has a bonus to strike in ranged combat (generic), then for missiles it means the missile has to be guided.

That's not Palladium's opinion, though, IIRC.
"Guided missiles" are a specific thing, under their rules, and "has a bonus to strike" isn't part of the definition.

The C-10 laser rifle has a laser targeting system that grants it +3 to strike, but I wouldn't say it fired "guided lasers."

[ShadowLogan]

I'm away from my books right now, so I can't check, but when I looked the other day I thought Plasma and HE had the same blast radius.
And part of my point is that X2 damage is a waste, when x1 will do the job for the same price.

No, they have different blast radius, the only ones that match are SRM-Plasma to SRM-HE (Med, the Light variety has a smaller radius), but for MRM/LRM/Mini's Plasma Missiles do have a larger radius than HE. I'm looking specifically at the table in the old RMB and CWC (sorry the quality of the table in RUE needs a magnifying glass to read) where the only difference is the damage the warheads can do. Now Fragmentation Warheads DO have a larger Radius (w/exception of MRM which is a match), but I am keeping them distinct from High Explosive.

If you only focus on one performance metric you could argue it's a waste but looking at various performance metrics together it changes the picture. For example, if a Mini-Missile Plasma, High Explosive and Frag Warheads are compared:
-Plasma will deal Average of ~35MD (can't be rolled with either) to the target AND ~18MD to everything else in a 15ft blast radius
-High Explosive will deal Average of ~18MD (can be rolled with) to the target AND ~9MD to a 5ft blast radius
-Now a Fragmentation will deal an Average of ~18MD (can be rolled with) to the target AND ~9MD to 20ft blast radius, HOWEVER it has 1/2 the maximum range of the other two missiles (which are the same at 1mile).
-IF the moving target penalties apply in a given situation, the Plasma Mini's speed would result in -24.6 strike vs HE/Frag Mini's speed of -10.6 strike

That means for x2 the cost of a HE Missile you are getting x3 the blast radius (it would take x9 HE Minis to equal the same AREA) as found in the cost of x1 Plasma Mini-Missile, with no loss of effectiveness in that larger area and is harder to defend against due to its higher speed. Now a Frag Mini-Missile may or may not be cost effective here given the loss in range (you could "save" money here but have to pay it elsewhere in terms of repairs).

I haven't done a break down on the SRM/MRM/LRM category, but given Mini Missiles are by far the most common missile type in Rifts IINM I don't see a need to.

The only factor seems to be the blast radius. If it's a BIG blast radius, then you can make two dodges to get out of it.

Not quite. Blast Radius is variable considering it is based on warhead type & range category. But you also have the variables of how many missiles are fired (this increases the blast radius). The most important factor that is not addressed IS how far you move when you dodge. It is left undefined and subjective to the target, we do know how fast a given subject can move in 1sec (SPD attribute for creatures, you can also convert MPH to ft/s for mecha by multiplying MPH by ~1.4 IIRC) or how fast a subject can accelerate.

It's not really about TIME; it's about how many attacks you have.

Yes and No. When you use an Attack you are spending a fixed amount of time in a melee round (it's non-specific given APMs vary by level/skills/natural abilities). So, if you don't have any APMs available you don't have any time to spend.

Now there are actions that don't cost any APMs (Auto-Dodge, Auto-Parry, etc) that you can in theory do all day long. I see them working though as your skilled enough to work them into whatever else you are doing for that period of time for the melee.

I don't have my book right now to look, but do they talk about any combat bonuses in that combat?
I just recall them giving the total, 14, not talking about how much of that was strike bonus.

Actually, reviewing the entire example (skimmed previously) they are inconsistent about it, sometimes they spell out the bonuses at play (WP and RC skills, guided missile). Sometimes they also say the die roll with Bonuses IS some number. Still at no time do they bring up penalties, even though it would be appropriate when shooting down missiles or attacking the fleeing Hover vehicle to show how they work.

That's not Palladium's opinion, though, IIRC.
"Guided missiles" are a specific thing, under their rules, and "has a bonus to strike" isn't part of the definition.

The C-10 laser rifle has a laser targeting system that grants it +3 to strike, but I wouldn't say it fired "guided lasers."

I'm just saying that the (RUE pg271 and pg273 for standard Robot/Power Armor Features) "[b]Laser Targeting System:[b] Assists in the selection and focusing of specific targets and adds a bonus of +1 strike when using long-range weapons. Does not apply to hand to hand combat or SAMAS." would meet the criteria laid out on pg364's "Unless indicated otherwise in a specific weapon, robot, vehicle or launcher description (...)" given that Laser Guided Munitions (including Missiles) are a thing in the real world AND missiles would qualify as a long-range weapon.

This view also avoids the potential issue of rectoning mecha that have oddly placed launchers that only really work if the missiles have some form of guidance when going from RMB-era books to RUE-era set of rules (I admit I can't think of a Rifts Example off-hand that isn't a Kittani design, it's more of an issue with the C&P of the rules into discontinued licensed 2E RT and some of its mecha)

[Killer Cyborg]

I'm away from my books right now, so I can't check, but when I looked the other day I thought Plasma and HE had the same blast radius.
And part of my point is that X2 damage is a waste, when x1 will do the job for the same price.

No, they have different blast radius, the only ones that match are SRM-Plasma to SRM-HE (Med, the Light variety has a smaller radius), but for MRM/LRM/Mini's Plasma Missiles do have a larger radius than HE. I'm looking specifically at the table in the old RMB and CWC (sorry the quality of the table in RUE needs a magnifying glass to read) where the only difference is the damage the warheads can do. Now Fragmentation Warheads DO have a larger Radius (w/exception of MRM which is a match), but I am keeping them distinct from High Explosive.

Verified, and I retract my statement about the blast radius of plasma.

The only factor seems to be the blast radius. If it's a BIG blast radius, then you can make two dodges to get out of it.

Not quite. Blast Radius is variable considering it is based on warhead type & range category. But you also have the variables of how many missiles are fired (this increases the blast radius).

Logically it would increase the blast radius.
Does it actually in canon?

The most important factor that is not addressed IS how far you move when you dodge. It is left undefined and subjective to the target, we do know how fast a given subject can move in 1sec (SPD attribute for creatures, you can also convert MPH to ft/s for mecha by multiplying MPH by ~1.4 IIRC) or how fast a subject can accelerate.

Palladium didn't seem to want to dig deep into the "dodging the blast radius" physics, so they seem to assume that pretty much any Speed level with pretty much any blast radius could take a couple dodges to get out of the way as long as the GM okayed it.

It's not really about TIME; it's about how many attacks you have.

Yes and No. When you use an Attack you are spending a fixed amount of time in a melee round (it's non-specific given APMs vary by level/skills/natural abilities).


So, if you don't have any APMs available you don't have any time to spend.

Not really.
If you have 5 attacks per 15 melee, each attack can sometimes be assumed to take roughly 3 seconds of time
But if you have 10 people attacking you in one melee round, you can dodge 10 times, using 10 attacks in 15 seconds worth of time, with the extra attacks coming off the next melee round.
(RGMG 32)

Time is fluid in Palladium mechanics, much of the time.
Attacks are not the same as time.

I don't have my book right now to look, but do they talk about any combat bonuses in that combat?
I just recall them giving the total, 14, not talking about how much of that was strike bonus.

Actually, reviewing the entire example (skimmed previously) they are inconsistent about it, sometimes they spell out the bonuses at play (WP and RC skills, guided missile). Sometimes they also say the die roll with Bonuses IS some number. Still at no time do they bring up penalties, even though it would be appropriate when shooting down missiles or attacking the fleeing Hover vehicle to show how they work.

They don't really get into any other penalties or bonuses, so that doesn't really mean much.

That's not Palladium's opinion, though, IIRC.
"Guided missiles" are a specific thing, under their rules, and "has a bonus to strike" isn't part of the definition.

The C-10 laser rifle has a laser targeting system that grants it +3 to strike, but I wouldn't say it fired "guided lasers."

I'm just saying that the (RUE pg271 and pg273 for standard Robot/Power Armor Features) "[b]Laser Targeting System:[b] Assists in the selection and focusing of specific targets and adds a bonus of +1 strike when using long-range weapons. Does not apply to hand to hand combat or SAMAS." would meet the criteria laid out on pg364's "Unless indicated otherwise in a specific weapon, robot, vehicle or launcher description (...)" given that Laser Guided Munitions (including Missiles) are a thing in the real world AND missiles would qualify as a long-range weapon.

I'm just saying that is incorrect.

RUE 364
No Missile Bonus To Strike: Unless indicated otherwise in a specific weapon, robot, vehicle or launcher description, mini-missiles and most other types of missiles are NOT guided and do not get a bonus to strike. Some launch systems or additional targeting system MAY provide a +1 to +3 bonus to strike, but even that is rather uncommon.

Targeting systems on the launcher do NOT make the missile into a Guided Missile.

Unless a missile launcher uses the phrase "guided missile," or unless the missiles being launched are specifically described as Guided, then they're not according to the rules.

This view also avoids the potential issue of rectoning mecha that have oddly placed launchers that only really work if the missiles have some form of guidance when going from RMB-era books to RUE-era set of rules (I admit I can't think of a Rifts Example off-hand that isn't a Kittani design, it's more of an issue with the C&P of the rules into discontinued licensed 2E RT and some of its mecha)

Palladium doesn't seem to know how real-world missiles work, and they don't seem to care.

[Zer0 Kay]

Everyone knows a metric buttload outweighs anything else on the battlefield

More than twice an imperial buttload!

But, seriously, get more people in power armor, and have them protect a mobile missile launcher.

At some point during the future warrior program. Or was it the land warrior project, I don't remember if it ever made it out of concept. There was an idea to have a Stryker modified to only carry vertical launch anti-tank missiles. The launch order would come from a networked laser targeting device mounted under barrel on rifles.

Maybe something like that. A large transport carrying a crapton of SRM missiles and troops in PA armed with a railgun, mini missiles and a marker/remote launch command device.

[ShadowLogan]

Logically it would increase the blast radius.
Does it actually in canon?

Actually, I don't think it has been addressed in canon (now or previously, and I looked at HU2E, Rifts RMB/RUE, RT 1E, and Macross2 main books, RT 2E is basically a C&P from RUE) directly in the rules on how the blast radius is to be handled in a volley*.

There is some precedent from Grenades when fired in burst** form having a greater blast radius than fired individually:
-WI-GL20 Automatic Grenade Launcher (Mercenaries pg105)
-TX-897G and TX-4504 Grenade Launcher (WB31: Triax 2 pg126 & 145-8)
-Megaversal Legion Grenade Launchers (WB9: SA2* pg116-20)

The only two other Burst Fire Grenade Launchers I could find (QST-98 in WB22 pg94, and WB14 pg176's Bandit 6000) don't address if the radius changes or not, and then there is an assortment of 17 grenade launchers that are described as firing volleys that I didn't cross check completely that also didn't address it in the ones I did. I also found a few grenade launchers that are pure Auto and don't fire single shots (in RT, so they don't help)

*While cross checking Grenade Launchers the Mini Missile system on the Megaversal Legion's AH-50 (WB9 pg123) states "Mega-Damage: Fragmentation: ..." (gives the damage/radius from table) "... Each missile raises the area affected by 10 feet (3.0m)." however this is not clear if it is universal to all missiles, just the fragmentation (AP mini missile is also in the entry with nothing about the radius), or unique to this platform, but there is some precedent for the idea.

**these might be applicable as on RMB pg42 when discussing Mini-Missiles and WP, the Burst bonus was considered to be equivalent to a Volley. Interestingly enough Aimed bonuses applied to firing 1 or 2 (2 does constitutes a volley).

Palladium didn't seem to want to dig deep into the "dodging the blast radius" physics, so they seem to assume that pretty much any Speed level with pretty much any blast radius could take a couple dodges to get out of the way as long as the GM okayed it.

I agree they don't want to get bogged down in physics or otherwise technical accuracy, but I generally take it as a Dodge takes you out of the radius no matter what as the missile misses you (that IS how it worked pre-RUE), which IMHO would also include the blast radius. Now there might be situations where the Dodge is not as complete as that, but if you can escape a 12ft radius per RUE w/o needing another action that would imply that anything that can do better than 12ft/s can escape a larger radius if there is enough room and they have sufficient speed.

They don't really get into any other penalties or bonuses, so that doesn't really mean much.

What other bonuses would have applied in the example in RMB?

Targeting systems on the launcher do NOT make the missile into a Guided Missile.

I have to disagree on this, for something to be considered a "missile" it must have a guidance system of some kind otherwise it would be a rocket.

It could also be pointed out that the full capabilities of the Targeting System are not described. We don't know how it grants a strike bonus for a given weapon system type***, however for missiles it would make sense that it would be due to some form of guidance on the missile in order to accommodate some of the more odd missile launcher placements with their non-forward facing launch trajectories that exist on some designs, and possibly even for longer range types (like SRM or MRM) to be effective. Now that guidance system might not qualify as "self-guided", but rather "semi-guided" both of which can be jammed, but the text on pg364 of RUE only seems to consider "self-guided" as a thing. A/The Targeting System(s) could be considered a form of semi-guidance.

Now Semi-Guided is not mentioned in RUE AFAIK, but a term introduced in Shemarian Nation (pg49 AFAIK) "Note that the jamming ability applies to 'smart' bombs and missiles, as well as other types of guided or semi-guided missiles.". Now it does callout that "Mini-Missiles aer NOT guided missiles" (typo is in text), but leaves it open they could be semi-guided by omission given the preceding text differentiates between them. It should also be noted that this system is also found in WB14 on the Wild Weasel SAMAS, where it allows the system to work on Mini-Missiles (which even in RMB are only ever described as not self-guided, so the text would imply some form of semi-guidance).

***As an example, if you attempt to dodge an attack from a laser targeting system assisted weapon what actually happened that you failed your dodge. Did you fail to simply move out of the way in time, or was the weapon able to track with you preventing you from getting out of reach so the attack could still hit? For a gun type system, it probably is immaterial which happened, but for a missile attack it would seem to be of more concern (especially if fired from longer ranges involving SRMs).

[Killer Cyborg]

Logically it would increase the blast radius.
Does it actually in canon?

Actually, I don't think it has been addressed in canon (now or previously, and I looked at HU2E, Rifts RMB/RUE, RT 1E, and Macross2 main books, RT 2E is basically a C&P from RUE) directly in the rules on how the blast radius is to be handled in a volley*.

There is some precedent from Grenades when fired in burst** form having a greater blast radius than fired individually:
-WI-GL20 Automatic Grenade Launcher (Mercenaries pg105)
-TX-897G and TX-4504 Grenade Launcher (WB31: Triax 2 pg126 & 145-8)
-Megaversal Legion Grenade Launchers (WB9: SA2* pg116-20)

The only two other Burst Fire Grenade Launchers I could find (QST-98 in WB22 pg94, and WB14 pg176's Bandit 6000) don't address if the radius changes or not, and then there is an assortment of 17 grenade launchers that are described as firing volleys that I didn't cross check completely that also didn't address it in the ones I did. I also found a few grenade launchers that are pure Auto and don't fire single shots (in RT, so they don't help)

*While cross checking Grenade Launchers the Mini Missile system on the Megaversal Legion's AH-50 (WB9 pg123) states "Mega-Damage: Fragmentation: ..." (gives the damage/radius from table) "... Each missile raises the area affected by 10 feet (3.0m)." however this is not clear if it is universal to all missiles, just the fragmentation (AP mini missile is also in the entry with nothing about the radius), or unique to this platform, but there is some precedent for the idea.

**these might be applicable as on RMB pg42 when discussing Mini-Missiles and WP, the Burst bonus was considered to be equivalent to a Volley. Interestingly enough Aimed bonuses applied to firing 1 or 2 (2 does constitutes a volley).

Palladium didn't seem to want to dig deep into the "dodging the blast radius" physics, so they seem to assume that pretty much any Speed level with pretty much any blast radius could take a couple dodges to get out of the way as long as the GM okayed it.

I agree they don't want to get bogged down in physics or otherwise technical accuracy, but I generally take it as a Dodge takes you out of the radius no matter what as the missile misses you (that IS how it worked pre-RUE), which IMHO would also include the blast radius. Now there might be situations where the Dodge is not as complete as that, but if you can escape a 12ft radius per RUE w/o needing another action that would imply that anything that can do better than 12ft/s can escape a larger radius if there is enough room and they have sufficient speed.

Hm.
It's been a while, but I think we generally played that dodging a missile meant you dodged the missile, and would get hit by the blast radius.
UNLESS you were dodging by some means that would let you get out of the blast radius in 1 attack (fast moving vehicle, super speed, etc., for bigger blast radii.)
I don't recall it ever being specified in the rules how it worked.

[quote[

They don't really get into any other penalties or bonuses, so that doesn't really mean much.

What other bonuses would have applied in the example in RMB?

Well, again, they don't even let us know what the SAMAS' strike bonus is. That doesn't mean that he didn't have one, or that nobody gets any strike bonuses when shooting down missiles.
Heck, we're not even told what the Enforcer rolls to strike with the missiles on that attack, nor what his bonuses are.
Like you said, they're inconsistent with that kind of thing in that battle example.

Lack of mention of a penalty in that kind of inconsistent description isn't necessarily or even probably meaningful.

Targeting systems on the launcher do NOT make the missile into a Guided Missile.

I have to disagree on this, for something to be considered a "missile" it must have a guidance system of some kind otherwise it would be a rocket.

It could also be pointed out that the full capabilities of the Targeting System are not described. We don't know how it grants a strike bonus for a given weapon system type***, however for missiles it would make sense that it would be due to some form of guidance on the missile in order to accommodate some of the more odd missile launcher placements with their non-forward facing launch trajectories that exist on some designs, and possibly even for longer range types (like SRM or MRM) to be effective. Now that guidance system might not qualify as "self-guided", but rather "semi-guided" both of which can be jammed, but the text on pg364 of RUE only seems to consider "self-guided" as a thing. A/The Targeting System(s) could be considered a form of semi-guidance.

Now Semi-Guided is not mentioned in RUE AFAIK, but a term introduced in Shemarian Nation (pg49 AFAIK) "Note that the jamming ability applies to 'smart' bombs and missiles, as well as other types of guided or semi-guided missiles.". Now it does callout that "Mini-Missiles aer NOT guided missiles" (typo is in text), but leaves it open they could be semi-guided by omission given the preceding text differentiates between them. It should also be noted that this system is also found in WB14 on the Wild Weasel SAMAS, where it allows the system to work on Mini-Missiles (which even in RMB are only ever described as not self-guided, so the text would imply some form of semi-guidance).

***As an example, if you attempt to dodge an attack from a laser targeting system assisted weapon what actually happened that you failed your dodge. Did you fail to simply move out of the way in time, or was the weapon able to track with you preventing you from getting out of reach so the attack could still hit? For a gun type system, it probably is immaterial which happened, but for a missile attack it would seem to be of more concern (especially if fired from longer ranges involving SRMs).

"Semi-guided" is still not guided.
Only "guided" missiles are undodgeable in groups of 4+, as far as the rules tell us.
"Guided missiles," in Rifts, especially in the context of the key RMB passages, are self-guided.

[Nevermore]

Behold the absolute superiority of bipedalism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0TaYhjpOfo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v7bWEgeNz4

How would wheeled, tracked, or flying vehicles ever match such astounding astoundingness? Especially with all the unnecessary tech and bulk going into these advanced, superior creations that the others have absolutely no need for. Nevermind their ability to carry oodles more weight.

Truly, humanoid robots are THE way to go for weapons of war. There's simply no contest.

[ShadowLogan]

Hm.
It's been a while, but I think we generally played that dodging a missile meant you dodged the missile, and would get hit by the blast radius.
UNLESS you were dodging by some means that would let you get out of the blast radius in 1 attack (fast moving vehicle, super speed, etc., for bigger blast radii.)
I don't recall it ever being specified in the rules how it worked.

There is nothing in the text in PRE-RUE main books I have that suggests that a Dodge wouldn't take you out of the blast radius. That is just one aspect of RUE's strange, revised missile system.

"Semi-guided" is still not guided.
Only "guided" missiles are undodgeable in groups of 4+, as far as the rules tell us.
"Guided missiles," in Rifts, especially in the context of the key RMB passages, are self-guided.

And I would say that "semi-guided" counts as guided from a game mechanical standpoint. The main issue is that AFAIK semi-guided is not elaborated on anywhere else, but if you can jam a semi-guided system as equally as a self-guided system, that would indicate the semi-guided mechanically follow the same game rules as self-guided.

[Killer Cyborg]

Hm.
It's been a while, but I think we generally played that dodging a missile meant you dodged the missile, and would get hit by the blast radius.
UNLESS you were dodging by some means that would let you get out of the blast radius in 1 attack (fast moving vehicle, super speed, etc., for bigger blast radii.)
I don't recall it ever being specified in the rules how it worked.

There is nothing in the text in PRE-RUE main books I have that suggests that a Dodge wouldn't take you out of the blast radius. That is just one aspect of RUE's strange, revised missile system.

Is there anything in the pre-RUE books that suggests the dodge WOULD take you out of the blast radius?


Meanwhile, RMB 41 refers to getting caught in the blast radius as something that happens during a "near miss" with a missile.
Their example is a missile hitting the person standing next to you, but I think it's pretty reasonable to describe a successful dodge as a "near miss."
The missile would have hit you, but you jumped out of the way; near miss.
The missile being so far off target that you don't have to dodge; just a regular miss.

"Semi-guided" is still not guided.
Only "guided" missiles are undodgeable in groups of 4+, as far as the rules tell us.
"Guided missiles," in Rifts, especially in the context of the key RMB passages, are self-guided.

And I would say that "semi-guided" counts as guided from a game mechanical standpoint. The main issue is that AFAIK semi-guided is not elaborated on anywhere else, but if you can jam a semi-guided system as equally as a self-guided system, that would indicate the semi-guided mechanically follow the same game rules as self-guided.

You would be incorrect, and/or have no basis in the rules for this claim.
You can dodge a missile or a particle beam, but that does not make missiles into a kind of particle beam or vice-versa.
Invisibility Superior hides you from sight and hearing, but that does not make sight into a kind of hearing.
EBA protects you from both bullets and fists, but that does not make bullets into a kind of fist.

Your argument form here is:
X protects from Y.
X protects from Z.
Therefore, Y is a kind of Z.

It does not follow logically.

[guardiandashi]

Hm.
It's been a while, but I think we generally played that dodging a missile meant you dodged the missile, and would get hit by the blast radius.
UNLESS you were dodging by some means that would let you get out of the blast radius in 1 attack (fast moving vehicle, super speed, etc., for bigger blast radii.)
I don't recall it ever being specified in the rules how it worked.

There is nothing in the text in PRE-RUE main books I have that suggests that a Dodge wouldn't take you out of the blast radius. That is just one aspect of RUE's strange, revised missile system.

Is there anything in the pre-RUE books that suggests the dodge WOULD take you out of the blast radius?


Meanwhile, RMB 41 refers to getting caught in the blast radius as something that happens during a "near miss" with a missile.
Their example is a missile hitting the person standing next to you, but I think it's pretty reasonable to describe a successful dodge as a "near miss."
The missile would have hit you, but you jumped out of the way; near miss.
The missile being so far off target that you don't have to dodge; just a regular miss.

"Semi-guided" is still not guided.
Only "guided" missiles are undodgeable in groups of 4+, as far as the rules tell us.
"Guided missiles," in Rifts, especially in the context of the key RMB passages, are self-guided.

And I would say that "semi-guided" counts as guided from a game mechanical standpoint. The main issue is that AFAIK semi-guided is not elaborated on anywhere else, but if you can jam a semi-guided system as equally as a self-guided system, that would indicate the semi-guided mechanically follow the same game rules as self-guided.

You would be incorrect, and/or have no basis in the rules for this claim.
You can dodge a missile or a particle beam, but that does not make missiles into a kind of particle beam or vice-versa.
Invisibility Superior hides you from sight and hearing, but that does not make sight into a kind of hearing.
EBA protects you from both bullets and fists, but that does not make bullets into a kind of fist.

Your argument form here is:
X protects from Y.
X protects from Z.
Therefore, Y is a kind of Z.

It does not follow logically.

the way I interpetet semi-guided vs self guided missiles missiles has little to do with the missile itself (kind of) they both have the same maneuverability and homing capabilities.
the real difference is in the guidance aspects
to use examples of modern (today) missiles a heat seeker guidance is a self guided missile
an image recognition guidance system is self guided.
a guidance system that uses external guidance aids like a laser designator, or a wire guided missile is a "semi-guided" missile because part of the system to get it to the target is external to the missile itself.

to use another (novel series) example in the "honorverse by david weber" they use a multi stage guidance solution
1 they launch their missiles and use "fire control" links to guide their missiles towards the targets and update them with the best info they have on the targets defensive countermeasures as long as possible
2 when the missiles have a good "solid" lock on the target they hand it off to its internal guidance and "penaids"
3 the missile goes into terminal attack mode where it tries to "strike" the target based on its warhead type (primarally nukes call them high explosive) and or laser heads IE stand off warheads

[ShadowLogan]

Is there anything in the pre-RUE books that suggests the dodge WOULD take you out of the blast radius?

You mean aside from "A successful roll means he has moved out of the way and takes no damage." under "The Dodge" rule description (example on pg41 RMB). They don't make an exception for missiles/AOE attacks, and we do see exceptions in the "To Roll w/" section just above concerning what you can not use "Roll" with, nor does the Dodging Guided Missiles section even address it.

This part to the rules is largely a C&P in the other main rule books I mentioned until RUE's revisions came along (and books based on RUE's revisions like 2E RT).

Meanwhile, RMB 41 refers to getting caught in the blast radius as something that happens during a "near miss" with a missile.
Their example is a missile hitting the person standing next to you, but I think it's pretty reasonable to describe a successful dodge as a "near miss."
The missile would have hit you, but you jumped out of the way; near miss.
The missile being so far off target that you don't have to dodge; just a regular miss.

I think you are taking the RMB example out of context. The example (right column pg41 starts with bold "Near Misses" correct?) does not involve the intended target attempting to dodge, it just says "is hit by a high explosive missile with a 30ft (9m) blast area." Nothing in the example indicates a dodge of any type/success-level happened for the intended target.

The "near miss" aspect IMHO is just poor wording on Palladium's part as really the "near miss" guy in the example isn't a near miss it's just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. To further illustrate, they don't exactly define when a "near miss" occurs either since if we go with a strict literal interpretation then it could cover (which I don't think anyone would really go for):
-a roll of 4 (8 in RUE) with no defensive action taken
-defender's defensive roll result ties
-defender's defensive roll result exceeds by a small amount (what quantifies as small?)
-defender's defensive roll result is close to the target number (what quantifies as close?)

What I think this (and below) illustrates is that Palladium's rules are not as detailed as they should be and to continue along this track is just going to come down to quibble over what the text means due to vagueness.

You would be incorrect, and/or have no basis in the rules for this claim.

I have to disagree. If you want to be nit-picky, the text doesn't establish what level of guidance must be present on the missile, just that it has some form/level of guidance. In which case a semi-guided missile would meet the criteria of "guided missile" for rule mechanic purposes since it is considered a "guided" missile at some level/classification. The only real hiccup I can see is when something can be considered "semi-guided", not if semi-guided counts as a form of guidance (RUE and RMB establish Mini-Missiles cannot be "Self-Guided" specifically, leaving room for them to be Semi-Guided).

And IMHO any equipment bonus* to strike that applies to the missile launcher equates to semi-guided status for simplicity. Unless of course you want to do a case-by-case basis for the hundreds of various missile launchers out there on all sorts of platforms (man-portable, PA, Robot, vehicle, implant, etc).

*Something as simple as "iron sights" or "crosshairs" would not apply, as I'm thinking of Equpment that can be used in the real world to guide missiles like a laser targeting system.

[Killer Cyborg]

Is there anything in the pre-RUE books that suggests the dodge WOULD take you out of the blast radius?

You mean aside from "A successful roll means he has moved out of the way and takes no damage." under "The Dodge" rule description (example on pg41 RMB). They don't make an exception for missiles/AOE attacks, and we do see exceptions in the "To Roll w/" section just above concerning what you can not use "Roll" with, nor does the Dodging Guided Missiles section even address it.

Yeah, aside from that.
I'm looking for something that doesn't hinge entirely on the circular logic of equating the AOE and the missile itself, as a reason to equate AOE and the missile itself.
You dodge a missile, and you obviously "move out of the way of the missile, and take no damage from getting struck by the missile," but that doesn't address blast radius one way or the other.

Meanwhile, RMB 41 refers to getting caught in the blast radius as something that happens during a "near miss" with a missile.
Their example is a missile hitting the person standing next to you, but I think it's pretty reasonable to describe a successful dodge as a "near miss."
The missile would have hit you, but you jumped out of the way; near miss.
The missile being so far off target that you don't have to dodge; just a regular miss.

I think you are taking the RMB example out of context. The example (right column pg41 starts with bold "Near Misses" correct?) does not involve the intended target attempting to dodge, it just says "is hit by a high explosive missile with a 30ft (9m) blast area." Nothing in the example indicates a dodge of any type/success-level happened for the intended target.

Reread the bolded portion of my comment, and perhaps address it.

The "near miss" aspect IMHO is just poor wording on Palladium's part

Perhaps, perhaps not.

To further illustrate, they don't exactly define when a "near miss" occurs either since if we go with a strict literal interpretation then it could cover (which I don't think anyone would really go for):
-a roll of 4 (8 in RUE) with no defensive action taken
-defender's defensive roll result ties
-defender's defensive roll result exceeds by a small amount (what quantifies as small?)
-defender's defensive roll result is close to the target number (what quantifies as close?)

Yes, Palladium is often overly vague.
In which case it's more reasonable, I believe, to avoid drawing specific conclusions from the vague texts.

What I think this (and below) illustrates is that Palladium's rules are not as detailed as they should be and to continue along this track is just going to come down to quibble over what the text means due to vagueness.

Exactly.
It's a common experience among Rifts players/GMs to discover that you may have played/interpreted the rules incorrectly for a decade or more, or maybe not, and that the company has no interested in clearing the matter up.

You would be incorrect, and/or have no basis in the rules for this claim.

I have to disagree. If you want to be nit-picky, the text doesn't establish what level of guidance must be present on the missile, just that it has some form/level of guidance.

Kindly quote the passage that states "the missile just has to have some sort of guidance."

All I've seen is the passages referring to "guided missiles," which are defined by Palladium as missiles that have their own guidance systems, and which are by definition NOT "semi-guided."

[ShadowLogan]

You dodge a missile, and you obviously "move out of the way of the missile, and take no damage from getting struck by the missile," but that doesn't address blast radius one way or the other.

Actually, it would the "A successful roll means he has moved out of the way and takes no damage." would mean they have DODGED by moving out of the blast radius/AOE. Now I will admit there are situations where that may be impossible (example, someone tossing a grenade into the utility closet you are hiding in), but that would be the obvious exception and not the rule.

Their example is a missile hitting the person standing next to you, but I think it's pretty reasonable to describe a successful dodge as a "near miss."

I do not think a successful dodge qualifies as a "near miss" due to the way Dodging is stated to work ("Dodge rules are the same as always", the only exception being if 4 or more are fired) and the way the "near miss" is stated to work.

As I said, "near miss" is a poor choice in words.

Kindly quote the passage that states "the missile just has to have some sort of guidance."

"Contrary to what one might think, a character can dodge one, two and even three guided missiles. The dodge rules are the same as always."-RUE pg364 (RMB pg41).

They do not consider anything about the type of guidance in that particular passage, as I said nit-picky since they omitted self- (which they call into use when discussing Mini-Missiles in both RUE and RMB). The existence under the rules of "semi-guided" AFAIK wasn't even a thing in RUE, but a later SB (Shem Nation, where it could be taken as an edited version of the RMB-version in WB14 that did not use "semi-guided" but "mini-missile" in its place as one of the edits to bring it up to RUE-version). In point of fact semi-guided are treated as self-guided for the purposes of jamming (via 2 methods*, one of which is similar to shooting down missiles), which at minimum suggests they follow some of the same rules as self-guided where nothing is AFAIK specifically said they use different rules to self-guided missiles (or not).

*One doesn't give a range and the other has a range of 2000ft/910m. Given the wide option for ranges for missiles, 2000ft/910m would mean you could jam a guided missile (self or semi) post launch for the laser pulse option. The other means the system can reach 1,800miles/2,893km or it has an unspecified shorter range (its other ranged abilities reach between 2000ft/910m and 500mile/800km) that would impact them post launch since it disrupts the "targeting system (and/or radio control signals and scanners)".

[green.nova343]

worrying about blast radii on a dodge vs. a missile should only come into play if a) you worry about determining where the missile actually impacts on a miss, & b) whether you worry about the missile having a proximity fuse.

Realistically...there are very few AAMs/SAMs anymore that rely on a direct impact to take out their target. The majority of them rely on a proximity fuse that detonates when the target is well within its "kill radius", so the dodge against the missile in real life is actually dodging the blast radius...but there's no game mechanic in Palladium rules to actually work for that. Just like there's no exact game mechanic for dealing with "the attacker deliberately shoots the missiles to impact next to the target to catch it inside the blast radius".

[Killer Cyborg]

You dodge a missile, and you obviously "move out of the way of the missile, and take no damage from getting struck by the missile," but that doesn't address blast radius one way or the other.

Actually, it would the "A successful roll means he has moved out of the way and takes no damage." would mean they have DODGED by moving out of the blast radius/AOE.

"A successful roll means he has moved out of the way and takes no damage [from the missile itself]" is at least as legitimate of a reading as "a successful roll means he has moved out of the way and takes no damage [from either the missile OR its blast radius]."

Either way, the phrase "takes no damage" isn't clear enough to know for certain what Palladium intended.

Now I will admit there are situations where that may be impossible (example, someone tossing a grenade into the utility closet you are hiding in), but that would be the obvious exception and not the rule.

And how is Speed really any different as a factor?
The issue with a room is that you physically cannot get out of the blast area, even if you successfully Dodge the grenade.
The issue with speed is that you physically cannot get out of the blast area, even if you successfully Dodge the grenade.

If the blast radius is X', and you cannot move X' in one attack/action, how could you get out of the blast radius?

Their example is a missile hitting the person standing next to you, but I think it's pretty reasonable to describe a successful dodge as a "near miss."

I do not think a successful dodge qualifies as a "near miss" due to the way Dodging is stated to work ("Dodge rules are the same as always", the only exception being if 4 or more are fired) and the way the "near miss" is stated to work.

As I said, "near miss" is a poor choice in words.[/quote]

I address "the way Dodging is stated to work" above.
"Near Miss" is NOT stated to work any specific way.
All we have is one example, not a list or definition.

Kindly quote the passage that states "the missile just has to have some sort of guidance."

"Contrary to what one might think, a character can dodge one, two and even three guided missiles. The dodge rules are the same as always."-RUE pg364 (RMB pg41).

That does not state that missiles just have to have any sort of guidance system.
Meanwhile, RMB 41 also states:
Missiles do not enjoy the pilot's combined bonuses to strike. Since they are all self-guided, missiles are launched as separate units with their own bonus of +3 to strike.

Note that what we're being told here is that if the Pilot's strike bonuses apply, then the missile is NOT self-guided.
This is the opening passage of the section titled "Strikes: Guided Missiles."

They tell us right of the bat that "Guided Missiles" refers to "Self-guided missiles."

They do not consider anything about the type of guidance in that particular passage, as I said nit-picky since they omitted self- (which they call into use when discussing Mini-Missiles in both RUE and RMB).

Because they use the terms "Guided" and "Self-guided" synonymously, as we see in the passage I quoted, and in other places.

The existence under the rules of "semi-guided" AFAIK wasn't even a thing in RUE, but a later SB (Shem Nation, where it could be taken as an edited version of the RMB-version in WB14 that did not use "semi-guided" but "mini-missile" in its place as one of the edits to bring it up to RUE-version). In point of fact semi-guided are treated as self-guided for the purposes of jamming (via 2 methods*, one of which is similar to shooting down missiles), which at minimum suggests they follow some of the same rules as self-guided where nothing is AFAIK specifically said they use different rules to self-guided missiles (or not).

Shooting down missiles is shooting down missiles.
How would Guided missiles be any different than non-guided in that context, other than with bonuses?

Anyway, Shemarrian Nation 49 says:
In order to jam incoming missiles, the robot must perform an Electronic Countermeasures skill check. A successful roll means that the targeting system (and/or radio control signals and scanners) of all missiles fired at the robot or in its path are scrambled, causing the missile(s) to veer off target...
In the alternative, the Male Shemarrian can send a direct, laser signal to one or two missiles within a 2,000' range, whether directed at itself or another target entirely, and scramble their targeting to make them veer off target...
Note that the jamming ability applies to "smart" bombs and missiles, as well as other types of guided and semi-guided missiles. The jamming defense disables the missile's tracking, guidance, and motor systems...

We are told that the way the jamming works is by disabling the missile's tracking, guidance, and motor systems.
We know that guided missiles are self-guided; they have on-board tracking, guidance, and motor systems.
The only reasonable implication I can see is that "Semi-Guided" missiles have off-board tracking, guidance, and/or motor systems (probably NOT motor systems).

A TOW missile or other wire-guided missile, for example, could be considered to be "semi-guided," in that the missile is not self-guided, but rather being guided by other operators.
Missiles guided wirelessly would be essentially the same; not self-guided (aka "guided"), but rather steered from another source/location.
In each case, there are tracking systems and/or some kind of guidance, BUT means that could be disrupted after launch by jamming the remote control mechanisms.

Which is not the same as a missile launched from a weapon that has something akin to the C-10's laser targeting system.
The C-10's system does not change the path of the laser mid-flight via remote control.
At least, I don't see any reason to think so.

So that's how the Shemarrian system works.

What does this mean for "semi-guided" missiles in the context of the dodge rules?
Well, I could certainly see an argument that a volley of 4 semi-guided missiles that were remote-controlled by computer to all hit the same target [i]could be reasonably ruled by the GM[/u] to be undodgeable in the same way guided missiles are.
But this would be a house rule.
The official rules never address semi-guided missiles and dodging; they only discuss guided missiles, which is only ever defined as self-guided missiles.
Yes, RMB and RUE came out before the term "self-guided" was introduced, and that means that there is at best a question mark as to how we're supposed to interpret things, NOT that there's a good argument that in canon semi-guided and self-guided use the same rules when it comes to dodging.

[ShadowLogan]

Either way, the phrase "takes no damage" isn't clear enough to know for certain what Palladium intended.

I think it is. While RUE seems to muddy the water, it is also left to GM discretion on when it applies to requiring a second dodge roll, so it really is NOT an automatic requirement and a GM can use their discretion relegating it to a non-issue if they choose per the rules.

And how is Speed really any different as a factor?
The issue with a room is that you physically cannot get out of the blast area, even if you successfully Dodge the grenade.
The issue with speed is that you physically cannot get out of the blast area, even if you successfully Dodge the grenade.

Missiles travel in the hundreds of mph, that means in 1second a 450mph missile (the slowest damaging missile on the table) will travel 660ft. Assuming Volleys combine blast radius directly (for simplicity), you'd need to fire a volley of ~33 SRM Frag (450mph speed) to even need to worry the blast radius for the intended target. And with, IINM, one exception (LRM-Frag which need ~25) the increased speed of other missiles coupled with their blast radius will require even more missiles to overcome the gap. So unless the Dodger moves in the same direction as the missile to reduce the distance covered in 1second significantly, speed alone in the context of a missile dodge isn't much of an issue.

Now Grenades (tossed or launched) do have the issue in that we don't know the speed they approach the target (they can also bounce). At which point the Spd attribute of the intended target is going to be a prime factor here, but due to target's motion and the motion of the grenade, it could still result in enough distance to be achieved (something like a volley/burst w/increased blast radius is more of an issue). How much motion the the grenade contributes here is more of a GMs call, but unless the blast radius is excessive (like >=20ft) most Average Characters should be able to cover the distance in the time frame of 1 action/dodge (SPD = ft/s), and mechanized targets should have an easier time (15mph = ~22ft/s) and/or we allow the full time an action represents to be considered (so if you have 7APM, your dodge distance would be for ~2seconds).

"Near Miss" is NOT stated to work any specific way.

In the example for "near miss", it works by being caught in the blast radius of the explosive when you are NOT the intended target.

Meanwhile, RMB 41 also states:
Missiles do not enjoy the pilot's combined bonuses to strike. Since they are all self-guided, missiles are launched as separate units with their own bonus of +3 to strike.

And if we are talking about RMB-era, this isn't an issue. RMB-era was quite clear, with the exception of Mini-Missiles ALL Missiles are guided by default and "Semi-Guided" was NOT used in the WB14 version (w/an RMB-era printing, I don't know about RUE-era printings) of the (later) Shem Nation SB's ECM Black Box they are using (per text). The issue is in the RUE-era rules and books based on them.

Because they use the terms "Guided" and "Self-guided" synonymously, as we see in the passage I quoted, and in other places.

I agree that is the intent when it was written, however a later work calls this into question given they introduced the term "semi-guided" without further elaboration on how they work mechanically in the game rules. While I would not say that "Semi- guided" and "self-guided" can be used interchangeably, either can be used interchangeably with "guided".

As far as how the ECM Black Box's work, yeah I know what it it says and how it works. The main issue is when does something qualify as "semi-guided" since the term is literally only used here AFAIK. IMHO it would qualify with any (appropriate) equipment bonuses, the main issue is that the generic lack of details on a given system doesn't help. We know 'PA/Bots have Laser Targeting Systems, but due to a lack of depth/detail we don't know if they operate like the C-10 (essentially as a sight to line up) or like a laser guided munition in the real world when paired with a missile weapon system.

Honestly I'm done with this topic at the moment as neither of us appears to have anything new to say and it's just us going around in circles.

[Killer Cyborg]

Either way, the phrase "takes no damage" isn't clear enough to know for certain what Palladium intended.

I think it is. While RUE seems to muddy the water, it is also left to GM discretion on when it applies to requiring a second dodge roll, so it really is NOT an automatic requirement and a GM can use their discretion relegating it to a non-issue if they choose per the rules.

Obviously, I disagree.
I mean, for one thing, if it WAS clear enough to know what they intended, then your group and my group would have played the same way.
But we didn't; we each thought we knew what was meant, and played accordingly, never questioning our interpretation until now.
Which for ME is something like 30 years.

I think the argument that the phrasing is "clear enough" doesn't pan out.

And how is Speed really any different as a factor?
The issue with a room is that you physically cannot get out of the blast area, even if you successfully Dodge the grenade.
The issue with speed is that you physically cannot get out of the blast area, even if you successfully Dodge the grenade.

Missiles travel in the hundreds of mph, that means in 1second a 450mph missile (the slowest damaging missile on the table) will travel 660ft. Assuming Volleys combine blast radius directly (for simplicity), you'd need to fire a volley of ~33 SRM Frag (450mph speed) to even need to worry the blast radius for the intended target. And with, IINM, one exception (LRM-Frag which need ~25) the increased speed of other missiles coupled with their blast radius will require even more missiles to overcome the gap. So unless the Dodger moves in the same direction as the missile to reduce the distance covered in 1second significantly, speed alone in the context of a missile dodge isn't much of an issue.

I'm talking about the issue of whether or not a character can dodge a blast radius with the initial dodge roll, based on whether or not they can move out of the blast zone in one attack/action.
As in, if a character is targeted by a single missile with a 12' blast radius, they successfully Dodge the missile, BUT can only move <10' per attack, that's going to lock them into the blast radius just as much as being in a 10' room would when dealing with a 12' blast radius.

In both cases, it's physically impossible for the defending character's dodge to take them out of the blast area, so in both cases it makes no real sense to allow them to dodge both the missile and the blast radius.

Not sure what you're talking about.

"Near Miss" is NOT stated to work any specific way.

In the example for "near miss", it works by being caught in the blast radius of the explosive when you are NOT the intended target.

What we're told is that one way for a Near Miss to occur "By being within the blast radius of the target struck by a direct hit."
This hinges on what one thinks they meant and intended by "direct hit."
To ME, if you're standing in front of a wall, you dodge an incoming missile, and the missile hits the wall, then the wall was Directly Hit by the missile, and you are caught in the blast area, then this meets the described criteria; you are in the blast radius of a target hit directly by the missile.
If you're standing on the ground, and you dodge the missile, same deal, depending on where the GM decides the missile lands; the ground is directly hit by the missile, and you are in the blast radius, therefore the conditions are met for a Near Miss.

OR if you're in a 10'x10' room, and a missile with a 12'+ is launched at you, whatever the missile Directly Hits, you're still in that blast radius.

Their one example happens to describe a PERSON next to you getting hit by the missile, but I see no reason official or otherwise to assume that this rule only applies to PCs and NPCs who are targeted, rather than to the inanimate; the physics are the same.
Likewise, I see no reason to believe that the rules were intending to say "if a missile is deliberately fired at the person/tree standing next to you, hits it, and detonates on that target, your character is ONLY caught in the blast area if the person launching the missile intended to hit that target; the physics of blast radii are contingent upon the intent of the person firing the missile.

Meanwhile, RMB 41 also states:
Missiles do not enjoy the pilot's combined bonuses to strike. Since they are all self-guided, missiles are launched as separate units with their own bonus of +3 to strike.

And if we are talking about RMB-era, this isn't an issue. RMB-era was quite clear, with the exception of Mini-Missiles ALL Missiles are guided by default and "Semi-Guided" was NOT used in the WB14 version (w/an RMB-era printing, I don't know about RUE-era printings) of the (later) Shem Nation SB's ECM Black Box they are using (per text). The issue is in the RUE-era rules and books based on them.

The only thing RUE changes is which missiles are self-guided, not the nature of what constitutes a "self-guided" missile.
Post-RUE, NOT all missiles are self-guided, most missiles these days DO enjoy the pilot's combined bonuses to strike, and they are NOT launched as separate units with their own bonus of +3 to strike.

What this passage tells us is that missiles that are Guided have their own strike bonuses, and do NOT use any bonuses from the person launching them.
RUE doesn't change that.

Because they use the terms "Guided" and "Self-guided" synonymously, as we see in the passage I quoted, and in other places.

I agree that is the intent when it was written, however a later work calls this into question given they introduced the term "semi-guided" without further elaboration on how they work mechanically in the game rules. While I would not say that "Semi- guided" and "self-guided" can be used interchangeably, either can be used interchangeably with "guided".

"Guided" by Palladium definition is "self-guided."
Guided missiles have their own bonuses to strike.
Whatever "Semi-Guided" missiles are, if they lack their own bonuses to strike, then they are not Guided Missiles.

The main issue is when does something qualify as "semi-guided" since the term is literally only used here AFAIK.

The fact that it's listed separately from "self-guided" means that it is not considered to be a "guided missile" by Palladium's definition.

And I think you should consider the idea that it really doesn't mean anything at all, that a writer just thought it sounded fancy, or was hung up on some personal mental distinction that doesn't matter in gameplay.

IMHO it would qualify with any (appropriate) equipment bonuses, the main issue is that the generic lack of details on a given system doesn't help. We know 'PA/Bots have Laser Targeting Systems, but due to a lack of depth/detail we don't know if they operate like the C-10 (essentially as a sight to line up) or like a laser guided munition in the real world when paired with a missile weapon system.

Doesn't really matter when it comes to the issue of guided missiles; guided missiles only ever use their OWN targeting system.
Any bonuses the bot or person launching the missile have don't matter with guided missiles.

Honestly I'm done with this topic at the moment as neither of us appears to have anything new to say and it's just us going around in circles.

[Killer Cyborg]

worrying about blast radii on a dodge vs. a missile should only come into play if a) you worry about determining where the missile actually impacts on a miss, & b) whether you worry about the missile having a proximity fuse.

We always tried to pay attention to where stray mega-damage attacks end up when they miss, and from Kevin's description of the dangers of always using Mega-Damage, he does to, at least to an extent.
I mean, in an aerial dogfight where there's no proximity detonation, sure, you can ignore it for the duration of the battle; there's nothing to make the missile detonate.
But in on-the-ground combat, there's always a good chance that a missile that misses YOU will hit the ground, a wall, or other object right next to you.
That was always GM's call, but we tended to default to "the missile strikes the ground where you were before you started the dodge."

Realistically...there are very few AAMs/SAMs anymore that rely on a direct impact to take out their target. The majority of them rely on a proximity fuse that detonates when the target is well within its "kill radius", so the dodge against the missile in real life is actually dodging the blast radius...but there's no game mechanic in Palladium rules to actually work for that. Just like there's no exact game mechanic for dealing with "the attacker deliberately shoots the missiles to impact next to the target to catch it inside the blast radius".

Yeah, Palladium falls short of real world battle a lot of the time, and their rules have a lot of gaps.

[Fenris2020]

I can deal with robots as part of the setting.
What I don't get is why Rifts helicopters and some other vehicles require such large crews.

[Killer Cyborg]

I can deal with robots as part of the setting.
What I don't get is why Rifts helicopters and some other vehicles require such large crews.

I never paid attention to the helicopters.
How many people do they have?

[Fenris2020]

I can deal with robots as part of the setting.
What I don't get is why Rifts helicopters and some other vehicles require such large crews.

I never paid attention to the helicopters.
How many people do they have?

Four.
A helicopter in modern times only needs one or two.
Why would a hyper-advanced version need more?

[ShadowLogan]

I can deal with robots as part of the setting.
What I don't get is why Rifts helicopters and some other vehicles require such large crews.

I can't speak for other vehicles, but there are 13 Helicopters in Rifts (maybe a few more that qualify as essentially or in books I don't have):
-5x of them have a crew of 2: a pilot and co-pilot/gunner or communications (in all fairness though 4x of these are GAW refits)
-1x has a crew of 3 (GAW's Chinook)
-7x with a crew of 4: pilot, co-pilot, communications, and gunner (sometimes the co-pilot doubles as another gunner).
-9x have troop capacity (6x of which can hold more than 2 passengers)

The larger crew helicopters (and likely other vehicles) having larger than expected crew likely comes down to 2 Game related Factors:
-1. Increase the combat effectiveness of a given platform from an Attacks per melee perspective (though I do admit I'm not sure if you need a dedicated communications station). Officially vehicles in general don't have anything like Robot Combat: Elite/Basic Skill (yes there is the Space Fighter Skill in PW, but that is specific platform and not written to be a general skill).
-2. Party Management. This gives everyone in a party a chance to contribute to the operation of a vehicle(s) in combat without requiring everyone to have the Pilot: Helicopter skill, which as the above count shows would make sense given how few Helicopters there actually are and the chances of needing it out of the 600+ assorted vehicles/PA/'bots in the various Rifts books (w/DBs).

[Fenris2020]

I can deal with robots as part of the setting.
What I don't get is why Rifts helicopters and some other vehicles require such large crews.

I can't speak for other vehicles, but there are 13 Helicopters in Rifts (maybe a few more that qualify as essentially or in books I don't have):
-5x of them have a crew of 2: a pilot and co-pilot/gunner or communications (in all fairness though 4x of these are GAW refits)
-1x has a crew of 3 (GAW's Chinook)
-7x with a crew of 4: pilot, co-pilot, communications, and gunner (sometimes the co-pilot doubles as another gunner).
-9x have troop capacity (6x of which can hold more than 2 passengers)

The larger crew helicopters (and likely other vehicles) having larger than expected crew likely comes down to 2 Game related Factors:
-1. Increase the combat effectiveness of a given platform from an Attacks per melee perspective (though I do admit I'm not sure if you need a dedicated communications station). Officially vehicles in general don't have anything like Robot Combat: Elite/Basic Skill (yes there is the Space Fighter Skill in PW, but that is specific platform and not written to be a general skill).
-2. Party Management. This gives everyone in a party a chance to contribute to the operation of a vehicle(s) in combat without requiring everyone to have the Pilot: Helicopter skill, which as the above count shows would make sense given how few Helicopters there actually are and the chances of needing it out of the 600+ assorted vehicles/PA/'bots in the various Rifts books (w/DBs).

-2. Loses the debate, since the "whole party" will be using other vehicles and so on, in my experience only one or two people will be interested in crewing the helicopter (one to pilot/ use weapons, the other to use weapons/ communicate).

[green.nova343]

I can deal with robots as part of the setting.
What I don't get is why Rifts helicopters and some other vehicles require such large crews.

I can't speak for other vehicles, but there are 13 Helicopters in Rifts (maybe a few more that qualify as essentially or in books I don't have):
-5x of them have a crew of 2: a pilot and co-pilot/gunner or communications (in all fairness though 4x of these are GAW refits)
-1x has a crew of 3 (GAW's Chinook)
-7x with a crew of 4: pilot, co-pilot, communications, and gunner (sometimes the co-pilot doubles as another gunner).
-9x have troop capacity (6x of which can hold more than 2 passengers)

The larger crew helicopters (and likely other vehicles) having larger than expected crew likely comes down to 2 Game related Factors:
-1. Increase the combat effectiveness of a given platform from an Attacks per melee perspective (though I do admit I'm not sure if you need a dedicated communications station). Officially vehicles in general don't have anything like Robot Combat: Elite/Basic Skill (yes there is the Space Fighter Skill in PW, but that is specific platform and not written to be a general skill).
-2. Party Management. This gives everyone in a party a chance to contribute to the operation of a vehicle(s) in combat without requiring everyone to have the Pilot: Helicopter skill, which as the above count shows would make sense given how few Helicopters there actually are and the chances of needing it out of the 600+ assorted vehicles/PA/'bots in the various Rifts books (w/DBs).

Which actually tends to match up with real-world helos. Chinooks have official crews of 3 (pilot, co-pilot, & crew chief), most Super/King Stallions are listed with 4 crew minimum (pilot, co-pilot, crew chief/engineer, & at least 1 door gunner). Even MH-60 Seahawks have 3-4 crewmen in them.

Now...if you're just running an attack chopper like the Apache or Cobra, then yeah, there should only be maybe 2 crew.

[green.nova343]

worrying about blast radii on a dodge vs. a missile should only come into play if a) you worry about determining where the missile actually impacts on a miss, & b) whether you worry about the missile having a proximity fuse.

We always tried to pay attention to where stray mega-damage attacks end up when they miss, and from Kevin's description of the dangers of always using Mega-Damage, he does to, at least to an extent.
I mean, in an aerial dogfight where there's no proximity detonation, sure, you can ignore it for the duration of the battle; there's nothing to make the missile detonate.
But in on-the-ground combat, there's always a good chance that a missile that misses YOU will hit the ground, a wall, or other object right next to you.
That was always GM's call, but we tended to default to "the missile strikes the ground where you were before you started the dodge."

Realistically...there are very few AAMs/SAMs anymore that rely on a direct impact to take out their target. The majority of them rely on a proximity fuse that detonates when the target is well within its "kill radius", so the dodge against the missile in real life is actually dodging the blast radius...but there's no game mechanic in Palladium rules to actually work for that. Just like there's no exact game mechanic for dealing with "the attacker deliberately shoots the missiles to impact next to the target to catch it inside the blast radius".

Yeah, Palladium falls short of real world battle a lot of the time, and their rules have a lot of gaps.

Sounds like you & your group are pretty on-the-ball. I would love for there to be some proximity-fuse rules for Palladium missiles (just one of the things they don't really get about "guided" missiles). I've sometimes used a house rule that if it's proximity fused, then there's an additional modifier on the dodge rule equal to (blast radius in ft) / 10 (minimum of 1), where basically if the modified dodge roll would have failed then you were caught in the proximity fuse blast (i.e. needed a 12 to dodge a missile with a 20ft blast radius; if you rolled a 12 or 13, the missile didn't hit you directly, but the proximity fuse goes off & you're caught in the half-damage blast radius)...but I think it works better if you incorporate some sort of "Margin of Success/Failure" concept into Palladium's game rules. From what I can tell, that seems to be a common theme in a lot of RPGs anymore, so it's not like someone can really say, "You stole that idea from game X!".

[Highlord]

Yeah, the only armor with legs I've ever been able to tolerate is powered armor, and even then only to a degree.

[ShadowLogan]

-2. Loses the debate, since the "whole party" will be using other vehicles and so on, in my experience only one or two people will be interested in crewing the helicopter (one to pilot/ use weapons, the other to use weapons/ communicate).

I do not dispute that Party could be configured in the way of having multiple solo vehicles, I only point out that such a configuration is only one option and that circumstances could require the party to use another.

I would also point out that players may not realize the value of multi-crew platforms with useful roles from their POV.

Which actually tends to match up with real-world helos. Chinooks have official crews of 3 (pilot, co-pilot, & crew chief), most Super/King Stallions are listed with 4 crew minimum (pilot, co-pilot, crew chief/engineer, & at least 1 door gunner). Even MH-60 Seahawks have 3-4 crewmen in them.

Now...if you're just running an attack chopper like the Apache or Cobra, then yeah, there should only be maybe 2 crew.

I think for the most part the non-GAW designs in Rifts try to be multi-role platforms that can be used in roles that GAW designs have largely broken down between more dedicated designs given they almost always have room for passengers or troops (even if only 2). Compared to GAWs 'copters the Apache and Cobra don't have room for passengers, but the Chinook does yet it lacks weapons, with their Kiowa and Blackhawk* being between the two (it's armed and carries passengers, but it is lightly armed in comparison to Apache/Cobra).

*what I find odd is that the GAW Blackhawk doesn't have optional stub-wings that could be configured to carry munitions or other equipment, and the Apache and Super Cobra are not configured with 2x weapon pods per stub-wing (they are at 1x each) plus the tip-rail station

[Fenris2020]

I can deal with robots as part of the setting.
What I don't get is why Rifts helicopters and some other vehicles require such large crews.

I can't speak for other vehicles, but there are 13 Helicopters in Rifts (maybe a few more that qualify as essentially or in books I don't have):
-5x of them have a crew of 2: a pilot and co-pilot/gunner or communications (in all fairness though 4x of these are GAW refits)
-1x has a crew of 3 (GAW's Chinook)
-7x with a crew of 4: pilot, co-pilot, communications, and gunner (sometimes the co-pilot doubles as another gunner).
-9x have troop capacity (6x of which can hold more than 2 passengers)

The larger crew helicopters (and likely other vehicles) having larger than expected crew likely comes down to 2 Game related Factors:
-1. Increase the combat effectiveness of a given platform from an Attacks per melee perspective (though I do admit I'm not sure if you need a dedicated communications station). Officially vehicles in general don't have anything like Robot Combat: Elite/Basic Skill (yes there is the Space Fighter Skill in PW, but that is specific platform and not written to be a general skill).
-2. Party Management. This gives everyone in a party a chance to contribute to the operation of a vehicle(s) in combat without requiring everyone to have the Pilot: Helicopter skill, which as the above count shows would make sense given how few Helicopters there actually are and the chances of needing it out of the 600+ assorted vehicles/PA/'bots in the various Rifts books (w/DBs).

Which actually tends to match up with real-world helos. Chinooks have official crews of 3 (pilot, co-pilot, & crew chief), most Super/King Stallions are listed with 4 crew minimum (pilot, co-pilot, crew chief/engineer, & at least 1 door gunner). Even MH-60 Seahawks have 3-4 crewmen in them.

Now...if you're just running an attack chopper like the Apache or Cobra, then yeah, there should only be maybe 2 crew.

I am very familiar with modern helos. I rode in them for years.
I see no reason for an advanced society to not have smaller crews, especially in attack choppers like the Iron Heart and CS varieties.

[Warshield73]

I am very familiar with modern helos. I rode in them for years.
I see no reason for an advanced society to not have smaller crews, especially in attack choppers like the Iron Heart and CS varieties.

My understanding reading these vehicles, as well as most of the other vehicles from IHA, is that they are lower technology options for people to use. That is why they are so cheap, especially as gas powered, so it seems to make sense that they would require more crew. In fact I believe GAW makes the CS helicopters or at least some of them. Still all three of these helicopters can be flown by just 1 or 2 people if need be.

EDIT: Fixed the quote box

[ShadowLogan]

I can deal with robots as part of the setting.
What I don't get is why Rifts helicopters and some other vehicles require such large crews.

I can't speak for other vehicles, but there are 13 Helicopters in Rifts (maybe a few more that qualify as essentially or in books I don't have):
-5x of them have a crew of 2: a pilot and co-pilot/gunner or communications (in all fairness though 4x of these are GAW refits)
-1x has a crew of 3 (GAW's Chinook)
-7x with a crew of 4: pilot, co-pilot, communications, and gunner (sometimes the co-pilot doubles as another gunner).
-9x have troop capacity (6x of which can hold more than 2 passengers)

The larger crew helicopters (and likely other vehicles) having larger than expected crew likely comes down to 2 Game related Factors:
-1. Increase the combat effectiveness of a given platform from an Attacks per melee perspective (though I do admit I'm not sure if you need a dedicated communications station). Officially vehicles in general don't have anything like Robot Combat: Elite/Basic Skill (yes there is the Space Fighter Skill in PW, but that is specific platform and not written to be a general skill).
-2. Party Management. This gives everyone in a party a chance to contribute to the operation of a vehicle(s) in combat without requiring everyone to have the Pilot: Helicopter skill, which as the above count shows would make sense given how few Helicopters there actually are and the chances of needing it out of the 600+ assorted vehicles/PA/'bots in the various Rifts books (w/DBs).

Which actually tends to match up with real-world helos. Chinooks have official crews of 3 (pilot, co-pilot, & crew chief), most Super/King Stallions are listed with 4 crew minimum (pilot, co-pilot, crew chief/engineer, & at least 1 door gunner). Even MH-60 Seahawks have 3-4 crewmen in them.

Now...if you're just running an attack chopper like the Apache or Cobra, then yeah, there should only be maybe 2 crew.

I am very familiar with modern helos. I rode in them for years.
I see no reason for an advanced society to not have smaller crews, especially in attack choppers like the Iron Heart and CS varieties.

Actually I could see them not reducing the crew size, even with higher technology.

The CS Helicopters are not strictly just attack choppers, they have multi-role capabilities. They also sport 3 separate gun systems each, plus Missile stations. For optimum results those choppers if equipped with a larger crew would be far more effective in combat than a vehicle with a crew reduced to 1 person. They have a crew of 4, most of which have access to weapon controls, allowing them to be far more effective in combat than if a single pilot was present (unless they had automated systems, which while present in the setting as a whole isn't something that is done much at all). One attribute of both of them is they are supposed to be inexpensive, which could be read as not putting the best technology in.

Iron Heart Industries isn't really any different either. Though their choppers are not as well equipped as the CS versions, though I do agree their crew size is odd (not enough weapon systems to justify a dedicated gunner IMHO). IH products are not supposed to be as advanced as the CS (#1 tech power based in NA, though Triax and Archie-3 would both knock them down a few pegs, so would the Kittani).

[Blackwater Sniper]

I haven’t read most of the posts, so if it’s already been posted, just disregard.

One of the biggest differences between Rifts warfare and “modern 21st century warfare” is the lack of satellites.

Today everything on the battlefield is interlinked with satellite communications. We can hardly think of going to war without such instant intelligence at our fingertips.

I was a part of the Field Artillery in Desert Storm, we mainly used visual determination from the forward observers to locate our targets. Then, the entire Battery would volley fire a salvo in predetermined arcs to hit not only the intended target, but an area around it just in case one round went awry. Today, Field Artillery has shells that are GPS guided and a single cannon can take out an individual truck in a (stationary) convoy if need be. This saves money, ammunition, and reduces the total number of Batteries needed in a Brigade.

A generation ago, you could only shoot what you could see, or laze (still line of sight). Today, missiles can be fired far over the horizon from stand-off ranges 20- to even hundreds of miles away. All thanks to the satellite.

On Rifts Earth, unless you have house rules stating otherwise, there isn’t a reliable network of satellites for people to connect with and accurately use while targeting. The best you can count on is lasers to determine distance, cameras to lock on the intended target, and thermo-sensors to seek out once fired. That limits you to a dozen miles at best.

[guardiandashi]

I haven’t read most of the posts, so if it’s already been posted, just disregard.

One of the biggest differences between Rifts warfare and “modern 21st century warfare” is the lack of satellites.

Today everything on the battlefield is interlinked with satellite communications. We can hardly think of going to war without such instant intelligence at our fingertips.

I was a part of the Field Artillery in Desert Storm, we mainly used visual determination from the forward observers to locate our targets. Then, the entire Battery would volley fire a salvo in predetermined arcs to hit not only the intended target, but an area around it just in case one round went awry. Today, Field Artillery has shells that are GPS guided and a single cannon can take out an individual truck in a (stationary) convoy if need be. This saves money, ammunition, and reduces the total number of Batteries needed in a Brigade.

A generation ago, you could only shoot what you could see, or laze (still line of sight). Today, missiles can be fired far over the horizon from stand-off ranges 20- to even hundreds of miles away. All thanks to the satellite.

On Rifts Earth, unless you have house rules stating otherwise, there isn’t a reliable network of satellites for people to connect with and accurately use while targeting. The best you can count on is lasers to determine distance, cameras to lock on the intended target, and thermo-sensors to seek out once fired. That limits you to a dozen miles at best.

this is mostly but not entirely true.
a "wealthy force" NGR, Coalition or even smaller forces could put relay devices up in the air similar to modern AWACS but not just for radar overwatch, but for com relays IE you have something in the air at 10-20kft (well below the altitude that would draw killsat attention) and have radio/laser coms use it as a relay point, and if you use good "relative" positioning grid info you could also use it for "dumb" indirect fire let alone "smart" targeting relay information

[glitterboy2098]

i think you are referring to radio based positioning systems like Loran-C and the russian CHAYKA, which use signals from ground based transmitters to determine position. these systems are useful for general navigation, but their accuracy is too low to be reliable for weapon aiming. and while most of the tech nations have the technology to do so, as written, they have not built such systems. so the use of such things would require the GM to add them to their setting.

(an AWACS would be useless for such systems. pretty much any mobile or moving transmitter would be useless as a positioning system element, since the math required to find your position is based on measuring the transmission angle and time difference from known geographical points. the only reason satellites in orbit work at all is the fact their orbits are highly predictable and don't change, so you can add some extra math in to account for it. needless to say some of the proposals people have made on these boards about loitering airship transmitter stations and the like aren't viable as a GPS alternative.)

[guardiandashi]

no I was thinking of radio/laser los com relay being the primary purpose,
with the possibility that if a observer/drone is at 10,000 ft for them the horizon is ~125 miles
so if the ground unit A says I see relay 1 at direction X at range Y and relay 2 is at direction W range Z that would in theory allow them to triangulate relative positions
also if ground unit 1 has some form of laser designator then another unit if its firing "smart" munitions (like modern "smart bombs, artillery shells, or guided missiles) that can home on a "painted target" then all they have to do is get it "close enough" that it can spot the "painted target" and it can then home in (guide itself) to the target

I am not saying its perfect and that you are going to get pinpoint accuracy on the first shot every time. but especially if you use a combination such as inertial navigation, designating a target, (and for "unguided artillery" saying I believe I am at relative x,y aim for xx,yy fire 1, when the round hits ok it hit at xxx,yyy correct a,b and fire 1 or close enough fire for effect IE that is effectively how artillery aimed before all the modern gps stuff was used

[Blackwater Sniper]

For the low-down on what's happening in Land/Space Warfare in the early 21st Century, check out "FM 3-14 Army Space Operations."

It shows the intricacies of what it takes to conduct modern operations.

It’s also good if you’re having a hard time falling asleep.