I was re-reading some notes of my own last night prior
to recreating a simple system I had written to generate infantry squads using
Steve Gibson's alternate infantry rules when the following thought occurred to
me.
I had incorporated a house rule that classed size one weapons
into energy using and non-energy using (based on whether they
had any power plant limitations in the design rules) and said
that infantry could carry any non-energy using size one weapon
effectively DFFG/1 and RFAC/1 IIRC as well as APSW's, GMS/L and
Light Artillery. So the questions are:
How realistic is the idea of a small team (say 3 troopers) humping around a
20mm Auto cannon and enough ammo to make it worthwhile?
Is light artillery the way to model a mortar team? How many markers should
they carry?
One of my Star Grunt units is based on the Steiner laser infantry platoon
(from Battle troops) these guys are all supposed to be armed with laser rifles
and have lasers as their support weapons, I could model these as say FP2 but
high impact say D10 with the
support lasers as a HEL/1 but how about a HEL/0.5? what would it's
stats be?
[OT] The programme was eaten by a hard disk crash and did vehicle
design as well my language was "colourful" to say the least.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Chris Downes-Ward wrote:
> How realistic is the idea of a small team (say 3 troopers)
Mmm. They sure wouldn't be able to lug many 20mm rounds, as well?
> Is light artillery the way to model a mortar team? How many
How about a.. *gasp* mortar team?;)
> One of my Star Grunt units is based on the Steiner laser infantry
I'd go for the gatling SAW stats?
Cheers,
> Chris Downes-Ward wrote:
How about making them a light infantry / anti-tank gun on a wheeled
carriage - akin to the 37mm AT gun / 75mm infantry gun units attached to
German infantry battalions in WWII? These could easily be manhandled short
distances by their crew. The difficulty would be carrying enough ammunition
when away from the towing vehicle.
> -----Original Message-----
[Bri] You are designating them an Anti-Armor Team as listed on p. 13,
yes? Here are my rules of Infantry Heavy Weapons Teams (IHWT): This is an
extention of the Anti-Armor Team listed on p.13 of DS2. They conform to
this
listing in all ways, but vary may carry any Class-1 weapon. These are
crew-served weapons. These teams carry only small arms for self defense
in addition to the heavy weapon. To support these weapons, the entire squad (2
or more teams) is considered to be carring high efficency powercells and ammo.
- Uses Basic FCS for HEL, RFAC, MDC and DFFG GSMs purchase
the appropriate Guidance System.
- Use normal Class-1 weapon ranges. GMS/L uses normal /L range.
- Does NOT use expendable ammo counters (may fire each round).
- Treated as Anti-Armor Team as listed on p. 13 of DS2
- Cost is for Infantry Rifle Team (or Power Armor Team) PLUS the cost
of a fixed mounted Class-1 weapon.
Valid heavy weapons for IHWTs are:
HEL/1, RFAC/1, MDC/1, DFFG/1, and GSM/L
> Is light artillery the way to model a mortar team? How many
[Bri] This is more tricky than it would first appear. The artillery
itslef takes 6 capacity points, more than the men do (but this includes 1
counter of ammo). Also, 1 round of artillery fire takes 4 capacity points, the
same amount as an infantry team itself! So if you take the 4 cp for ammo from
the 6cp for the mortar, you get the mortar itself at 2 cp. Each team can carry
a
maximum of 2 cp (GMS/L is 2 cp and is the biggest thing infantry can
carry under standard rules). So... 1 Team to carry the Mortar (no shells) and
2 Teams per Mortar Ammo Counter. The unit must have an unused ammo counter to
perform Harrashment fire. Both the Mortar and Mortar Ammo Teams are under
the restrictions of Anti-Armor Teams on p.13 (i.e. can only carry
close-defense weapons in addition to the mortar or ammo).
> One of my Star Grunt units is based on the Steiner laser infantry
[Bri] I would not go to HEL status. I too would call it a Laser SAW. I
would base it on the Laser Sniper Rifle found in the back of the book. I would
take it to FP:12, I:d8. Looking at the ESU Gauss Sniper Rifle and the Gauss
SAW, they have the same
statistics (but arrive at them differently - the FP of the SAW comes
from the number of shells and area covered; the FP of the Sniper Rifle comes
from
the very accurate shot [quality of weapon _and_ sniper]). I would also
give the Laser SAW the same statistics as the Laser Sniper Rifle (again, same
effect through different means).
> [OT] The programme was eaten by a hard disk crash and did vehicle
--- "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
> Valid heavy weapons for IHWTs are:
I'm with the other poster on this--MDCs and HELs have
hellacious energy requirements. I don't see that
happening.
> [Bri] This is more tricky than it would first
No, it includes 3 rounds of ammo.
Also, 1 round of artillery fire takes 4 > capacity points, the same > amount
as an infantry team itself! So if you take > the 4 cp for ammo from the
> 6cp for the mortar, you get the mortar itself at 2
> --- Chris Downes-Ward <cdownes-ward@9a.co.uk> wrote:
> that infantry could carry any non-energy using size
OK, I'm with you. Especially powered armor--I've got
an elite drop troop regiment that uses DFFG/1s as
support weapons.
> How realistic is the idea of a small team (say 3
The cannon, no problem. The problem is ammo for an automatic weapon. I wish I
had some of my books that give weight of modern 20mm ammo, but it's not light
and if you use it automatic you'll run into problems soon. I could see a jeep
hauling around a 20mm cannon on the bed, dropping it off with a bunch of ammo,
then hiding in the woodline. No problem. But not light infantry.
> Is light artillery the way to model a mortar team?
Yup. I generally do 3. But I also generally haul them around in jeeps as well.
> I could model these as say FP2 but high impact say
Naah... I'd go for FP3 impact d6 tunable down to
FP2/d8 or FP1/d10. That's based on my experience with
Traveller lasers--they can do either single pulses or
break them up into a _lot_ of pulses that do very
little penetration.
> -----Original Message-----
[Bri] You are right.
> Also, 1 round of artillery fire takes 4 > capacity
OK. So if you go with Team of 4-8 (squads of 8-16), that is still only 8
or 16 rounds per team. Now we have to determine how many rounds equates to a
15 minute EFFECTIVE barrage from one light artillery team covering an 200
meter radius area. And the number of rounds that would be used in harassing
fire over a 15 minute turn covering the same area (these don't count against
the ammo counter, but if we are breaking it down to what an individual soldier
can carry, then it matters). I would suggest that an ammo counter should equal
about 1 turn (15 minutes) worth of EFFECTIVE fire and 2 turns (30 minutes) of
Harassing fire. Not having served, how many rounds is this?
As you described, the ammo would be deposited in a selected spot. If the
artillery team had to move, they would be unable (without help) of moving the
ammo with them (so would loose the mortar ability or require the other teams
to help port the ammo).
---
> Bell, Brian K wrote:
> OK. So if you go with Team of 4-8 (squads of 8-16), that is still only
3 rounds, maximum. If you keep firing longer than this, two things happen:
1) The target unit has thrown itself into cover, making subsequent rounds
*far* less likely to score damage (ie., they're essentially wasted), and
2) The enemy counter-battery radar gets a good fix on your location.
Expect counter-battery fire within a minute or two...
Regards,
> > > [Bri] This is more tricky than it would first
I do not understand, I thought there was "room for 3 rounds" but that I had to
buy the rounds separate. Are you saying that the artillery comes with he first
three rounds automatically?
A newbie who is still attempting to learn the rules (all three games
:-)
> I could see a jeep hauling around a 20mm cannon
This brings to mind the Vietnam era troops with the recoilless rifle mounted
on one of the mechanical mules. Seems this could be one way to do it. A
special vehicle not much larger then the troops using it, but large enough to
carry weapon and ammo.
Here are some links with pictures of the mules and some with the Rifles
mounted.
http://www.public.usit.net/brantr/history.html
http://www.public.usit.net/brantr/106.gif
> On 6-Apr-01 at 13:12, Oerjan Ohlson (oerjan.ohlson@telia.com) wrote:
> 2) The enemy counter-battery radar gets a good fix on your location.
So does anyone use any rules for counter-batteries against on-table
assets?
Also, we stealth airplanes, looks like it would be much easier to stealth an
artillery round or a missile. True?
By the way, the first link is not a joke, the picture I meant for you all to
see is at the bottom of the site. I just realized what the first picture was.
Sorry.
Daniel
> -----Original Message-----
> --- Roger Books <books@mail.state.fl.us> wrote:
> So does anyone use any rules for counter-batteries
Yeah. The counter-battery fight can be a battle in
itself if I'm running the game.
--- "Casquilho, Daniel" <Daniel.Casquilho@disney.com>
wrote:
> I do not understand, I thought there was "room for
No, you're not confused. We were just talking space.
You still have to pay points for each and every round of ammo.
> > I do not understand, I thought there was "room for
Thanks John, I thought I had it figured out right.
--- "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
> OK. So if you go with Team of 4-8 (squads of 8-16),
4.
> that is still only 8 or > 16 rounds per team. Now we
No, it's over 200. Every man in the company carries 2 60mm rounds, drops them
off with the 2 60mm mortars, and goes onto attack.
Dedicated ammo porters could carry far more rounds.
> can carry, then it matters). I would suggest that
WHOAH! 15 mins? Not bloody likely. There would never be a barrage that long.
Too dangerous. And take too much ammo. No, a fire mission is generally
no more than 6-9 rounds per gun--remember the beaten
zone is due to the submunitions in most rounds. And the rounds don't actually
fall for the entire game turn. Otherwise you'd be calling in artillery and
letting it block off avenues of approach and everyone who drove through there
for the rest of the turn would be subject to fire.
OK. So you have 200 rounds, but your infantry team cannot move out of
integrety range from it or it cannot fire the mortar. This I can accept.
If you are saying that you can dump the ammo on a location on the board and
have the Mortar Team go anywhere on the board and fire, this I would have a
problem with.
---
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net ICQ: 12848051 AIM: Rlyehable The Full Thrust Ship
Registry:
http://www.ftsr.org
---
[quoted original message omitted]
> --- Brian Bell <bkb@beol.net> wrote:
I've never had a problem with people wanting to move mortars all over the
place. Anywhere you'd attack
with light infantry doesn't have counter-battery
radars (presumably--I've never run a scenario that
has) and mortar range is still 'tabletop' so why would you move it? It's never
come up so I havn't thought about it.
> > If you are saying that you can dump the ammo on a location on the
John A said:
> I've never had a problem with people wanting to move mortars all
Counterbattery isn't the only thing that would make your mortar team want to
move. If I were serving the mortars and saw an enemy platoon coming over the
hilltop 200m away, I wouldn't delay to gather up the
rounds--I have sensitive skin, easily affected by kinetic energy
> --- Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:
> Counterbattery isn't the only thing that would make
One presumes that the player can tell when things are
going that badly tits-up and has started to withdraw
his forces--or we've called the game.
> Roger Books wrote:
> 2) The enemy counter-battery radar gets a good fix on your location.
Of course. If I can't get a LOS to them, that is.
> Also, we stealth airplanes, looks like it would be much easier
For missiles, partly true. That's about all I'm allowed to say at this
point :-(
For artillery rounds, not true - at least not with current Stealth
tech. If it had been, we would've fielded stealth artillery rounds already,
but neither current artillery launch mechanisms nor the
ballistics/aerodynamics of gun rounds are really compatible with
today's stealth techniques. (And, of course, today's Stealth techniques aren't
effective against all the types of sensors used for
counter-battery purposes either...)
Regards,
> On 7-Apr-01 at 11:30, Oerjan Ohlson (oerjan.ohlson@telia.com) wrote:
> For artillery rounds, not true - at least not with current Stealth
That's odd. It seams like if you use a discardable sabot you could use
whatever shapes and coatings on the round you wanted. Are artillery rounds
spin stabilized? I would guess this could render stealthing by shape
irrelevant.
> Roger Books wrote:
> For artillery rounds, not true - at least not with current Stealth
You could use a discarding sabot provided that it doesn't reduce the payload
too much and that its separation doesn't disturb the path of the round too
much. This could allow special stealth coatings to survive the launch.
The shape of the round is only really important in the trajectory -
*after* you've discarded the sabot. Stealth shapes tend to give poor
aerodynamic properties unless combined with advanced control and maneuver
systems. A stealth aircraft has such systems, but it is hard to fit them into
an artillery round without reducing the payload drastically. It's no good to
fire a stealthed round if it can't hurt the target when it arrives.
> Are artillery rounds spin stabilized?
Most are; the main exception are mortar grenades (since the mortars usually
aren't rifled, so they don't have anything to make the rounds spin).
Fins are large and heavy (which either decreases the gun's range or the
round's payload), increase the drag (which also decreases the range),
and tend to increase the radar cross-section from angles other than
straight ahead. An artillery round is rather less able than an aircraft to
maintain the same attitude to potential observers throughout its flight path.
Regards,
> Roger wrote:
I use counter-battery a lot and have rules for it on my site. Artillery
battles in my DS2 games can be very interesting.
A breakthrough scenario?
The line collapses and the mortar team (about 1/2 way up the table) and
its support is ordered to slow the enemy as long as possible, fall back to
possition X (end of the board), under support from another artillery unit.
Hot Landing? A company has been disgorged by dropship (which has left). The
company has some (minimal) artillery support in the way of a Mortar Team and X
number of chits. You have to set up the artillery on Hill X to support
additional
landings. Hill X is half-way across the table (the closest place that
the dropship could land). Unfortunatly, there are several teams of opposing
forces that have infiltrated the "secured area".
What situations would you put the Mortar Teams in that would not be better
served by an artillery vehicle? Mountains? Swamp? It would seem to me (and
again I do not have experience) that unless the terrain makes it impossible
for a vehicle, it would be better not to encumber a whole platoon (or company)
with artillery shells, but to put them on an artillery vehicle and
ammo carring vehicle. [E-mail does not convey emotions correctly - this
is not sarcastic, but inquiring.]
---
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net ICQ: 12848051 AIM: Rlyehable The Full Thrust Ship
Registry:
http://www.ftsr.org
---
[quoted original message omitted]
Brian Bell asked:
> What situations would you put the Mortar Teams in that would not be
Well, if you don't have vehicles, eg you're the militia, resisting an
incursion--KV fighters have been shooting up trucks, you've manpacked
a mortar almost within range of their power plant when your point runs into a
KV patrol...
> --- Brian Bell <bkb@beol.net> wrote:
Done that--but the mortars were towed 240mm mortars.
Some old Soviet stuff that I bought because they were just too damn cool.
Unfortunately the attackers never got far enough to shoot them up. No question
that those puppies were immobile and the ammo was too.
> What situations would you put the Mortar Teams in
[E-mail does not convey > emotions correctly - this is
> not sarcastic, but inquiring.]
Well, I only use mortar teams in my "light" formations. Light units mostly
exist on two ends of the spectrum of military units. At the top end, they are
the highly mobile (strategically, not tactically or operationally) units used
when you have to get them there now, and that's the only artillery support you
can fit into the planes/helicoptors/small fast
starships. The other end is militia formations that can't afford a proper SP
howitzer. Everyone else is mechanized. I follow the American lead in that even
my light infantry is somewhat motorized--lots of jeeps
and such. I prefer to keep the jeeps with the mortars to lug them around and
avoid such questions but sometimes it's not appropriate to the situation at
the time.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> For missiles, partly true. That's about all I'm allowed to say at this
The problem is partly that other than less-reflective materials,
stealthing largely depends on reducing the radar cross section
('reflectiveness') towards certain directions. As a natural result, RCS
increases in other directions. (Additionally, you're looking to remove any
straight corners, as they act as natural retro-reflectors, giving a very
high radar cross-section).
A missile is mainly concerned with being deteced head on; a clear area where
you'd want to reduce RCS. Artillery rounds, however, can be tracked on the way
up as well as on the way down; already two big different aspect angles.
Furthermore, with artillery, you're not so much concerned about sensorts ON
the target, but much more with sensors 'somewhere out there'. Therefore, it
would be almost impossible to find a way to present a minimum RCS at all
times.
Anyway, that's just some of the stuff taught inr adar design courses, I'm
_sure_ there's more complicated stuff I have no idea of, but this should
give a clue of the principles involved.
Cheers,