_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOK, I
am not in the military and know very little of the realities of close quarter
battle (for which I am immensely grateful). So all of the
following is based on my imagination/reading and the rules. As such, if
I am talking out of my posterior in the below then I will not be offended if
somebody were to tell me.
Lets consider two figures in close combat. Infantry Close assault takes place
over the area occupied by two figures. Let's say the bases of each figure are
1 inch diameter. That's roughly 2 square inches per pair of combatants.
The ground scale of SGII is 1 inch to 10 meters so that's roughly a 20 meters
squared area that our combatants are fighting over. Over 20 squared meters I
think I'd rather have the assault rifle than the kukri.
Further evidence to support this claim can be found on page 41 "the final
charge against the enemy strongpoint with grenades, bayonets and
lots of gung-ho attitude!" This, at least to me, suggests that some of
the close assault takes place over distances slightly greater hand to hand.
After all, nobody wants to use a grenade up close and personal. Though I will
concede SOME of the combat is intended to be at arms length, far from all of
it is.
I look forward to having my logic ripped apart...
> OK, I am not in the military and know very little of the realities of
close quarter battle (for which I am immensely grateful). So all of the
following is based on my imagination/reading and the rules. As such, if
I am talking out of my posterior in the below then I will not be offended if
somebody were to tell me.
Most combat takes place at a medium or short range for whatever the common
weapon is AND for the type of ground you are fighting on. In the desert where
the ranges are long and the cover is nonexistent, that range may be several
hundred yards to several thousand yards. In the woods and hills that may come
down to less than several hundred feet. In a town, within a building, that
gets down to the next room. Knives and "personal" weapons are useful when
combat is close, the gun is jammed, when you can sneak up on your opponent,
and when you have to make it really personal.
Most of the time you are not shooting at anyone specific - that is a
wargame myth. Most of the time you can't see your opponent - you are
shooting at an area - because very few folks are stupid enough to be
seen. Only really good troops do much aiming. Remember that the universal
number is 1%. 1% of bullets actually hit their enemy on average. When firing
automatic, only the first 3 rounds count, after that you are firing at the
birds. Yea, this is why the newest version
of the M-16 fires 3 round bursts.
Note that the 1% applies in the AWI with a 3 round a minute musket, an
M1 Garand of WWII or an M-16 in Iraq.
Most buildings today are made up of wall board, wood, and hollow doors.
Inside a building, don't expect to have doors and walls stop bullets.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lThis
factor below is why I like systems that have you firing at a unit and not
individuals. These systems also tend to use supression rules and abstract
casualties which seems to more accurately, in is vagueness, simulate modenr
combat IMO.
-Eli
> Most of the time you are not shooting at anyone specific - that is a
> M1 Garand of WWII or an M-16 in Iraq.
> On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:27 PM, emu2020@comcast.net wrote:
> This factor below is why I like systems that have you firing at a
And it jives with SG2's model in that suppressions are the primary result, and
if you follow the rules as written, actually casualties are totally random. I
think it's a great model to follow for squad based games.
D.