Hi everybody!
I'm preparing for a game, and kinda wonder about the list's opinion on the
scenario. I also wonder about the lack of rules covering infantry assaults on
vehicles. So my first question is:
1) Has anybody on the list prepared rules to simulate close assaulting a
vehicle?
2) How does this sound: Two squads of average infantry (Regular with
leaders rated at 2) supporting four Robotech/Exo-Squad robots (two
Spartans and two Excalibers, if you need to know...) on a hilltop, versus a
full company of infantry (regular and veterans with a few leaders rated at
one). I've been thinking the two squads would have dug in.
I'm not sure how balanced that is. I was thinking of giving the company two
Aliens Dropships (front cannon, eight guided missiles and 18 rockets) and
adding a pair of Raidars X for Air Defense. I also thought about mines for the
defenders, or a single sniper (or both). The company would have mortars
attached, perhaps a Powered Armored Infantry squad too, but I kinda thought
the defenders could do without any art (unless it's orbital, which makes up
for its power by its
delay...).
Well, what do you guys think?
> Hi everybody!
There are rules for infantry attacking point targets with both small arms (but
don't expect to scratch a MBT with your bayonette!) and point fire weapons.
Otherwise why would anyone want to close assault a vehicle?
> 2) How does this sound: Two squads of average infantry (Regular with
Sounds interesting. The question I have is, are you playing on a HUGE table or
are you playing on a big floor? This much kit would quickly swamp a 6x4 table
making a duckshoot of the game.
> Alfredo
The cheapest metal PA I've seen so far is the GZG range. They do Figs for 95p
each (check th Geo Hex Web page for the US prices) of fairly good quality,the
chunkiest are the NSL suits and the most hummanoid are the NAC suits. The toy
stuff I've seen is universaslly crap. I've heard that the micro machine range
has a number of 25 mm figs (prepainted) but I've no idea what the quality or
cost is.
Have a look for out of print lines, there was a PA game a while ago
(Dragonstar Rising, I think) which had lots of figs, these can be picked up
for reasonable prices these days. An alternative is to go to Games workshop
and see if they have any of thier old plastic terminator figs, these suck (a
great American expression!) but they may sell you them cheap. I believe also
that Peter Pig still produces (metal) PA figs very cheaply, but the last ones
I saw were of very suspect quality and poorly cast.
> Anybody has converted this toys to Stargrunt terms? Otherwise I'll
The only toys I've used are the Galoob Action Fleet stuff and a Rifleman from
the battle tech range (it makes a great fire support walker).
Good luck hunting cheap PA figs!
Now that i can write to the group again.
> Alfredo wrote:
Well, what do you guys think?
A good way to build scenarios is to have a story behind it.
Make a story and then add in the player element.
Don't worry about the sides being equal: rarly in war are the sides equal. as
long as the fighting is believable. (i.e. a commander wouldn;t go against un
win able odds unless the prize was ultra great, he had no choice or the
mission was to delay for other parts of the army). Somthing like that.
if the story behind the game is good and will be fun for all players then go
for it.
Some times we play where we auction out who can use the least amount of troops
to acomplish an objective. Who ever bids the lowest playes with those troops
and we keep
score.... ect..
it's fun..
CMC
[...]
> 1) Has anybody on the list prepared rules to simulate close
Insanity. I enjoy every minute of it.:)
> 2) How does this sound: Two squads of average infantry (Regular with
Having not yet played *any* SG2, what are people's average forces for a 6x4
table?
> P.S. Any ideas as to what I could use for Power Armor? I'm using,
I toss a second vote in for the GZG line of figs. I *really* like the NAC inf
squad and few PA troops I acquired recently.
Mk
> On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Stuart Murray wrote:
> There are rules for infantry attacking point targets with both small
Maybe they have a satchel charge, AT grenades or plain old molotov cocktails?
Or disintegration grenades...
Whatever happened to the old 'spanner in the works' or metal object in the
tracks? There are always weak points in any armour, it's just a matter of
sticking the appropriate tool into it.
> There are rules for infantry attacking point targets with both small
> Whatever happened to the old 'spanner in the works' or metal object
Exactly! According to an old friend of mine who was on a Mountain Infantry
unit, part of his infantry training was on how to close assault tanks. I
believe the Egyptians did that in one of the
Arab-Israeli wars (the Israelis had Uzi's vs. rifles in the Egyptian
hands, so after killing a number of soldiers with their better range, the
egyptians just assaulted the tanks with grenades and satchel charges...) Mind
you, I could be wrong (all this info comes second hand), but still, tanks *do*
have blind spots...
Anybody here ever read _The Art of Maneuver_? I forget the name of
the author. If you have, you probably know where I'm coming from...
> Whatever happened to the old 'spanner in the works' or metal object
So if troops have cherges of some sort just decide how you want them to act,
for example a satchel charge may be used as a point fire weapon, range 1 band
only, I d12x2. Then determine who has these charges and how many they have
(these denolition charges must be significant to maim an MBT so possibly limit
to 3 per trooper). The vehicle cannot 'close assault' a
foot trooper, it must fire upon them (or try to squash/maneuover round
them). It's a matter then of being able to get close to the vehicle
through screens of defending infantry/vehicle defences. All this is of
course a risky business for an average grunt.
A while back I sent in some mail on armour overrunning infantry in DS. In that
I gave the example of Russian troops being trained to let tanks roll over them
and them hit them with the anti tank grenades they get issued with from
behind. I would have thought that the Egyptians were doing something similar
but then I was under the impression that only half the Isreali infantry had
Uzi's the rest using FNL rifles. And just to add to your thoughts on infantry
close assulting armour, Afghan Guerillas used to take out Russian tanks by
smearing mud over the driver's vision ports and then shooting him when he
opened up the clean them. Just an idea.
Tony
twilko@ozemail.com.au
> At 09:20 AM 13-06-97 +0000, you wrote:
> After Stuart wrote:
> So if troops have cherges of some sort just decide how you want
Well if the tanks let themselves get away from their own infantry support they
deserve to be roasted in their shells! The satchel charge of 1d12x2 sounds
good but really shouldn't the infantry have to place the charge?
So what about a close assault attack as against another infantry squad but
conducted as an attack versus the top armour of the tank (for the improvised
charge use the 1d12x2 and perhaps for some specialist
anti-armour charge 1d12x4?) To do this would require some sort of
reaction or CL test (What? Me run out at that 35 tonne tank with this canvas
bag with a 30 second timer? I just remembered an appointment with my broker!)
If the infantry pass the test then the assault goes in. Just roll for the
penetration. Satchel charges may be an improvised explosive package of C4
blocks or some other explosive or perhaps a purpose built clase anti armouor
weapon. Some type of beehive charge similar to that used for cratering or
steel bridge demolitions. In any case the infantry need to be close enough to
actually place it.
In a similar vein here is a recent example - Bosnia - brit
Warrior MICVs would be "taken hostage" by the placement of an anti tank mine
in front and behind the vehicles tracks! I admit it would be a gutsy move in a
hot zone but improvisation can be amazing.
Now conversely what about the anti-infantry devices placed on
the hull of AFVs as in Hammer's Slammers? Now that could be a whole new
ball game......
> So what about a close assault attack as against another infantry
Just
> roll for the penetration.
WRONG! I like the CL test to make the attempt but you need an opposed die roll
in there. You should at least have to roll a quality die and perhaps a
die based on vehicle size (Class 1 (d4) - Class 5 (d12) {easier to find
an area on a big tank} and lets face it, inexperienced troops would have no
idea where to place the thing) vs. the quality die of the AFV (experienced AFV
crews would be more aware of enemy close assaults and their own
weaknesses). Then you have results.. MAJOR RESULT- Check for
penetration x2
MINOR RESULT- Check for penetration NO RESULT - Unit placing
charge/anti
tank weapon suppressed "OH SHIT! NOTHING HAPPENED! GET DOWN!" This would imply
some risk to the unit placing the weapon. If you mess it up, you're gonna be
suppressed next to a big tank with a mad crew. I would say for an improvised
charge Penetration should be D12 and for a specialist charge
D12x2. Satchel Charge Class 1, Anti-Tank Magnetic Mine Class 2. The
cool thing is, you can use this to breach holes in buildings and such...Cool!
Let me get this straight... You want to use satchel charges against tanks?
Screw that, make up some rules for IAVRs in SG. Why would any infantry unit
charge up next to a tank (that probably has infantry support) and try to stick
a satchel charge up under the turret ring.
There are many safer (somewhat) methods of taking out a tank. Top attack
LAWs, GMS/Ls, mines, Air Support...
The main use for satchel charges is for blowing up a big bunker or building.
In response to Jerry:
Now this is more like it! Still any thoughts on the anti-infantry
device/weapons?
Owen Glover
> ----------
I agree with the thinking. In modern day armies there are enough
anti-armour weapons about without having to improvise. And lets face it
I would rather hit the tank/APC from a safish distance than run out into
the open and dodge around those moving tracks or blowing fans!
But it is still an option. And what about those who like to add in
Battletech/Walkers? The Grey Death Legion led the way in developing anti
mech tactics and satchel type charges played a big part in it.
Owen Glover
> ----------
This is true. But what if you're playing in a genre where the low-tech
world is fighting a high tech army, you could be using satchel charges.
> At 05:39 PM 6/15/97 -0400, you wrote:
> Alfredo Lorente wrote:
> P.S. -> I sat down to work on the stats for the
I was giving that some thought the otherday, converting a robotech style
varible fighter over to DSII rules, It would function like a ground support
aircraft in fighter mode
and like a vtol in gerwalk/guardian mode or a walker in battleoid mode
pretty useful peice of work if you ask me
chris
> On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, Jerry McVicker wrote:
> This is true. But what if you're playing in a genre where the
Even during WWII there were a number of weapons used for anti-tank that
were juust more than improvisations. The British had the PIAT (Projector,
Infantry, Anti-Tank) the Sticky Bomb, limpet grenades, etc. Sure the VC
would strap a bunch of TNT to a poor bloke and he would run like hell for the
command center or other suitable target and blow himself to smithereens along
with the target if he got there.
Not to mention such things as light recoiless rifles that the russians used,
The PanzerSchreck or US Bazooka, or the PanzerFaust.
The stickey bomb was just that, a Heat munition with an adhesive that was
meant to be thrown at a target like a tank. Hopefully sticking.
The PIAT fired (actually with a spring action, no propelling charge here) a
HEAT charge out to around 50 ft. Very good for close in action, but not much
at longer ranges.
> On Sun, 15 Jun 1997, valen wrote:
> I was giving that some thought the otherday, converting a robotech
I have already given this a little thought. VTOL Aerospace fighters and
Variable fighters both. I'd suspect it could be easily handled by paying for
both forms of Mobilit and just caculating bvp as for the more expensive
mobility form.
So you want a VTOL/Aerospace fighter? Just pay for both Aerospace
mobility and VTOL mobility. Want a land cruiser from Appleseed? Build a size 5
tank with Highmobility wheeled and Fast Tracked. Want to use your LAMs from
Battletech? (the Variable or Valiable fighters from Macross), just pay for
VTOL, Aerospace, and Combat Walker. I'd suspect it would get a mightbit
expensive, though it'd sure make up for it in mobility. Your armour would
suffer for it though.
> Glover, Owen wrote:
Remember that these troops generally only acted within built up areas
where anti-personnel work was extremely difficult - also anti tank
weapons were only minimally effective against Mechs due to the ablative
nature of the armour used - SGII armour is all or nothing (and I usually
get nothing :-}) and your basic missile or rocket launcher does a pretty
damn good job on just about any vehicle - walker, crawler or floater.
Just my 2c.
> Ryan Montieth Gill wrote:
Well, since this keeps coming up, I might as well explain why I asked the
question...
I'm preparing a scenario where a Militia Quality company assaults a lightly
defended hill. The hill is occupied by six mechs and two squads. Here is the
breakdown of the forces:
Attacker (All are regular or green, mostly value 2 leaders (no level 1
leaders)): Company Command Squad (6 men) Company Command Security Squad (8
men)
Four platoons, composed of: Command Squad (with Heavy Weapons) (8 men) Four
Squads of Light Infantry (8 men each)
Mortar Battery (3 tubes)
Attached Air Support (Two Aliens Dropships) Attached Power Armor platoon
Perhaps (depending on the playtesting) a Battalion level Arty observer...
Defender (Most Veteran, with one leader level 1, the rest level 2):
Two Raidar Mechs (Air Defense/Anti Vehicle)
Two Spartan Mechs (Anti-Vehicle/Air Defense)
Two Excalibur Mechs (Anti Vehicle/Artillery)
Two squads of infantry (10 men each) One Sniper in one of the squads, One
Machine Gunner in the other squad.
Orbital Artillery, but no observer (I think...)
Ok. As you can see, it's going to be BIG, and a meat grinder. I am expecting
the Attacker to have to blow up the mechs with close assaults, since there are
only eight or so major guns for the point targets, and the defender has those
huge monsters making craters where there used to be assaulting militia...
Regardless, my interest in infantry assaulting vehicles comes from the fact
that not all battles are fought between well supplied and equipped armies. The
VC disabled helicopters with bamboo sticks, which to my knowledge were neither
explosive nor rocket propelled (they probably were single use, tho')... So say
I have a scenario
where a mob attacks a small garrison - I think any scout cars
assigned to the garrison would button up (even tanks), and then your
visibility is drastically reduced. That means people can sneak behind you and
slap explosives in your tin can. (I'm not saying it
would be easy - Heck, I wouldn't do it! - I'm saying that if the
assaulter passes a confidence test of threat level say two, he/she
can make tha assault...)
On a tangent, risking changing the thrust of the responses from the question
above to this rhetorical question (and being bombarded by hate mail and
flames), the reaction I've seen ("Why would you do that?! Fire at them from
afar!!") is a product of the American fascination with Hardware, the concept
that SciFi is about nifty toys and not people, a combination of both, or
something completely
different. I don't want anybody to take this personnally - I don't
even know whose message I'm responding to. It's just that I wonder how even
asking about simulating such a risky and dangerous maneuver, which has
happened and will keep happening, brings up such a "Don't!" response...
Too much rambling already. And I've gotten a lot of help from the list. It's
just that I find it rather difficult to understand...
> Ryan Montieth Gill wrote:
I give squads in my SG games IVARS...maybe 3 to a squad. The problem we had
was...who is carrying the damn thing? I took a Squad Leader approach to the
thing. Instead of trying to keep track of who was carrying the IVAR we
allotted the squad 3 IVARS. To fire an IVAR the squad had to pass a leader
check. Roll the quality die, if you roll a 1, either the no one was in
position to fire the IVAR or the person who is carrying it couldn't get the
shot off. Each time one is actually fired subtract it off the sheet. The next
time you try to fire an IVAR a.) subtract 1 for each IVAR already fired and b)
subtract 1 for each casualty the squad has suffered. Example.
A regular squad of six men has three IVAR's. An enemy APC rolls up in
range and the squad wants to take a pot shot at it with an IVAR. The player
rolls a D8 for the IVAR and rolls a 3. The IVAR is fired, but to no effect.
The APC opens up with its support weapons and kills 2 of the troopers. During
the squads next activation, they remove suppression and attempt to fire
another IVAR. This time they roll a d8 and subtract 3
(1
for one being fired and 2 for casualties) The player rolls a 4. 4-3 =1
No one seems to have an IVAR in firing position. Lower quality troops will
tend to "loose" their IVAR's or at least their nerve to fire it, while elite
troops are more likely to pick it up from a downed comrade and willing to get
in that tanks face to fire it. Any comments or suggestions would be nice. What
do you think?
> Alfredo Lorente wrote:
Assuming that you really, really /want/ them to pull off close assaults
against threats like that, why not just specify that once in CA, they
have to make a Leadership roll at -1 and, if successful, allow them to
attack a vehicle in CA as if with IAVR. This makes it extremely difficult to
do, but quite possibly very effective.
Of course, you /better/ hope the mechs aren't carrying APDC. :)
> Well, since this keeps coming up, I might as well explain why I asked
Let me make a prediction here. The militia will charge up the hill, get
suppressed on the way, and get shot to pieces by the defending infantry and
mechs. Let me know if I'm correct. How about letting the militia units
infiltrate? Make it a night mission and give the militia player counters for
his units and another half dozen dummy counters. At night, I allow counters to
be checked by using a sensor roll. Any unit that comes within 2 range bands
and open ground is automatically spotted and ANY unit that fires is
automatically spotted. Make the defender lax...they're behind the lines taking
it easy. A guerilla strike.
> On a tangent, risking changing the thrust of the responses from the
Here Here! That was my point. It has been done, it will be done in the future
and the desparation required to close assault an armored vehicle must be
great. The problem is...its not modeled in the system. Easy enough to rectify,
make one.
> I don't want anybody to take this personnally - I don't
> Ryan Montieth Gill wrote:
There already are rules for IAVRs in SG. What do you think the weapon stats
for Infantry Rocket are for? An IAVR is exactly the same as a rocket launcher
only it can only fire once.
And using a rocket is ahrdly my idea of CLOSE assault, anyway.
Cheers,
> At 18:26 19/06/97 +0100, you wrote:
<snip>
I like it a lot, as it saves having the 40k response of "its not on the
figure, it is not in the game". Mayby as part of the GZG weapons pack they can
make IARV?
> At 18:26 19/06/97 +0100, you wrote:
I use two alternatives. A low tech approach is to make a 'representative'
IVAR. I have used a bit of rolled up putty, it doesn't look good but you can
tell instantly who has the IVAR. Alternatively, nominate the squad as carrying
the IVAR, it may be reasonable to assume that if a trooper carrying the ivar
gets shot someone else will pick it up, this way you only need to keep track
of squad expenditure rather than figure (I prefer this way myself).
Fair comment by Stuart. I tend to treat it as the same as smoke. There tends
to be no specified limit as to haow many times a squad can produce a smoke
screen, but it would be reasonable to assume that each soldier would only
carry one or two smoke grenades. "So who's got smoke left?" is not a question
we deal with in a game.
The philosophy of the game is moving, firing and reacting at SQUAD level. The
idea of doling out the IAVR is probably more suitable to a skirmish game. But
hey, we all have our prferences in the rules. My favourite part in the rules
is the bit about "HAVE FUN". That's why I play it!
Owen Glover
By the way, if you can get them the Oceanic Union figures will have some
carrying IAVR; they look very similar to the M72 LAW or the Sov RPG18. Scratch
build using plastic sprue.
----------
From: Stuart Murray [SMTP:smurray@aecom.yu.edu]
Sent: Saturday, 21 June 1997 0:37
To: FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
Subject: RE: Close Assault and Scenario (Stargrunt)
> At 18:26 19/06/97 +0100, you wrote:
I use two alternatives. A low tech approach is to make a 'representative'
IVAR. I have used a bit of rolled up putty, it doesn't look good but you can
tell instantly who has the IVAR. Alternatively, nominate the squad as carrying
the IVAR, it may be reasonable to assume that if a trooper carrying the ivar
gets shot someone else will pick it up, this way you only need to keep track
of squad expenditure rather than figure (I prefer this way myself).
Stuart