There's a SG WW2 conversion at:
http://www.l-25.demon.co.uk/
> The assault rifles that the Germans were starting to use later in the
The light assault rifle had shortened rifle ammunition cartridges with
smaller powder charges - hence the weaker impact factor. It had various
names, as originally Hitler (and a lot of other people) frowned on the idea
and the project was started as a new machine pistol.
It started off as "Maschinenkarabiner 42" / Mkb 42 - Machine Carbine
To hide its purpose t was renamed "Maschinenpistole 43" / MP 43 -
Machine pistol Once Hitler was convinced, he renamed it to the more impressive
"Sturmgewehr
44" / Stgw 44 - assault rifle
Info here:
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as51-e.htm
Among the interesting accessories were an infra-red scope for night
fighting and a curved barrle extension that allowed to shoot around corners
without exposing yourself.
The 'cool-looking' one was designed for the paratroopers and used
full-power
rifle cartridges because the Fallschirmjäger wanted long-range
firepower. It
was called simply ;-) the 'Fallschirmjägergerät 42' / FG 42 -
Paratrooper's machine 42
Pictures here:
http://www.fg42.net/
Greetings
G'day,
I intend on mainly using my Dad's Army figs for FMA <they can be the homeguard
of the community which grew from the mining facility known as "Walmington on
C";)> but I do have enough for a small SG force. This got me to wondering
about the WWI and WWI conversions of SG that have been mentioned before.
Anyone got a url a quick search via google didn't help too much.
Do bolt action rifles count as Low-Tech Assault Rifles or are they
poorer still? And the tommy guns are they OK to be treated just as SAWs? I
guess it'd be OK if both sides were using WWIIish troops, but what if I'm to
spring them on Derek's NSL Panzergren's?
Going further back and thinking of WWI has anyone tried it in SG and if so how
do you represent the "mad minute"?
Briefly stepping into DS land too... I've always thought of DS as a primarily
vehicle based thing and we haven't seen oodles of infantry used regularly
here. If you shift to a primarily infantry based force (just as a bit of a
change) are there any changes you'd suggest? I've a couple ideas that need
some more thinking through, but someone else may have already done that for me
;)
Thanks
On Tuesday, June 04, 2002 9:53 AM, Beth.Fulton@csiro.au
> [SMTP:Beth.Fulton@csiro.au] wrote:
I think they're listed as the worse rifle, FP:0.5, I:d8 Tommy guns would be
FP:d4 or d6 with I: d8
This would keep it within the generic rules, so you can pound his NSL in a
full frontal charge (don't forget the bayonets to give you a +1 CC
shift).
'Neath Southern Skies - http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/
[sstrike] Raider Fleet of War Leader Kel'em'all
> Do bolt action rifles count as Low-Tech Assault Rifles or are they
FP1 if you're feeling kind, otherwise FP0.5
> And the tommy guns are they OK to be treated just as SAWs?
no, more like basic assault rifles, probably with lower range and penetration
> I guess
Better have a numbers advantage. Assuming the panzergrens have built in helmet
comms and the WW2 guys do not, that will do you in right there. Ideally you'll
have a GM. Issue your plan at the beginning of the game. Your units move
according to the plan, except when you can make a comms roll to pass a command
along. You can only attempt a comms roll if both units have a radio (probably
only platoon leaders element) or if they're within a few inches of each other.
Oh, and if the panzergrens have an EW trooper along, you can probably forget
the radio.
Hi Beth,
You're probably going to get a dozen answers to this, but I thought I'd kick
in my $0.02 anyway:)
> Do bolt action rifles count as Low-Tech Assault Rifles or are they
In SG terms, I'd use bolt-action rifles as FP:0.5 with Impact d8 or d10
maybe. They wouldn't qualify as a low-tech assault rifle. That would
be
something like the AK47. A bolt-action military rifle is more like a
hunting rifle than any of the other SG weapons.
Tommy Guns are short range and low-power (compared to, say, a proper
assault rifle or a battle rifle). They use pistol ammunition. They would
properly be used as a submachinegun. Something like FP 2 or 3 and Impact
d6. And probably range limits too - like they could only fire in the
first 2 rangebands or something.
Looking at a few Aussie, Brit and US WWII examples:
Owen (that was the WWII Aussie SMG, wasn't it?) - FP:2 IMP:d6
Lee Enfield Bolt Action Rifle - FP:0.5 IMP:d10
Springfield '03 Bold Action Rifle - FP:0.5 IMP:d10
M1 Garand Semi-Automatic Rifle - FP:1 IMP:d10
Browning Automatic Rifle - FP:d6 IMP:d10
Sten SMG - FP:2 IMP:d6
.50 Machinegun - use as RFAC 1
Boys antitank rifle - use as HAMR
BREN light machinegun - FP:d8 IMP:d10
Thompson SMG - FP:2 IMP:d6
For those who were wondering, my assumptions were that the Impact d8 weapons
would be approx equivalent to modern 5.56mm rounds. The WWII
large-bore rounds used in all the standard WWII rifles, and the modern
7.62mm Nato type ammo would be IMP d10. I'd leave IMP d12 to things like the
gauss rifles, or modern weapons like the.300 Wetherby Magnum or
something like that - much heavier hitting than "standard" military
ammo.
Given that the SMG ammo of all types used during WWII has less impact effect
than modern 5.56mm, I thought IMPd6 is appropriate.
The SMG's have FP2 because of limited ammo. The FP3 weapon examples in the
game are assault rifles (same rate of fire and ammo capacity as an SMG, at a
minimum) but with attached GL's. I wouldn't given any standard WWII weapons
that I can think of an FP3 rating.
I gave the BREN a slightly better FP than the BAR because the BREN had larger
capacity magazines...
The assault rifles that the Germans were starting to use later in the war
(I forget the names, but there were two I'm thinking of - one had, I
believe, an "MP-something" designation, and the other was the cool
looking
gun made for the paratroops that had a side-mounted magazine and a
pistol grip that was angled back like a Luger pistol's) would be FP2, IMP d8
(for the first) and d10 (for the second).
> Going further back and thinking of WWI has anyone tried it in SG and if
No idea. I don't think I'd normally go this far back using SG rules. At least,
not for trench warfare... That would just be UGLY in SG terms.
Hope this helps:)
(ps - Ok, so where there any terms/acronyms I should have explained ;)
I've got a bunch of WWII 25mm figs that are really nice, and just screaming
out for some paint... Been thinking about doing SG-WWII for a while...
Have fun, and let us know how it goes:)
G'day,
> Better have a numbers advantage. Assuming the panzergrens have built
Especially since most of these guys have hearing aids (I'm adding a
"suppressed" due to winding if I roll doubles for any combat move)
> Ideally you'll have a GM.
I'm wacky enough without any help usually;)
> Issue your plan at the beginning of the game....
I was going to do something similar and definitely no command action transfer
unless in shouting distance.
> And don't forget the WW2 guys probably have no body armor.
Definitely none, only 2 guys even have helmets in the set I have.
Cheers
G'day,
> There's a SG WW2 conversion at:
Thanks for the link and the info Karl.
Cheers
G'day,
So far we have
Bolt-action rifle:
Brendan: FP:0.5, I:d8 Laserlight: FP:0.5, I:? Adrian: FP:0.5, I:d8 or d10
Tommy guns: Brendan: FP:d4 or d6, I: d8 Laserlight: like an AAR Adrian: like a
submachinegun
So it looks like
Bolt-action: FP:0.5 and I:d8 (though one dumb question... if a hunting
rifle gets an FP1 in SG why only a 0.5 for a bolt-action are they worse
still or is this a factor to do with it being WWII vintage?) Tommy gun: FP:3
and I:D6 and restricted to 2 range bands (i.e. not close
only, but not much better - by the way went for FP3 for now this may
change if I can ever save up to get the machine gun figs)
Turning to Adrian's post:
> Owen (that was the WWII Aussie SMG, wasn't it?) - FP:2 IMP:d6
Umm could well be it rings a bell... I'll ask Derek when I get home.
> Lee Enfield Bolt Action Rifle - FP:0.5 IMP:d10
Thanks for all those.
> I wouldn't given any standard WWII
Like I said for now I'll use them as FP3, but this may drop back to FP2 fairly
quickly depending on how things go.
> No idea. I don't think I'd normally go this far back using
Sounds like a challenge to me;P
I was thinking of treating the "mad minute" as an SMG or SAW with FP:D6 and
IMP:D8 at least as a first cut.
> Hope this helps :)
Muchly thanks!
> (ps - Ok, so where there any terms/acronyms I should have explained ;)
Nope everything's fine thanks... I still glaze over when people start talking
about ammo sizes, but that's my problem not yours;)
> I've got a bunch of WWII 25mm figs that are really nice, and
Must be pretty noisy;)
> Been thinking about doing SG-WWII for a while...
Will do. It probably won't happen for a fortnight or so though as I have to
finish the paint jobs and Derek has a big NSL vs Imperial Guard match coming
up (well by our standards...he had a decent chunk of our ping pong table
covered with troops and vehicles all lined up when I got home last night, I
don't think either of us had realised how much he'd slowly scrabbled together
over the last few years!) so it will have to wait until after that.
One last question. How do the grenades of WWII compare to grenades of today
- I'm trying to avoid asking Derek so I can surprise him with my
cunning... well surprise him at any rate;)
Thanks
Hi,
> I was going to do something similar and definitely no command action
And what would you say shouting distance should be?? (plz don't say it's in
the rules... then I'd feel really stupid :-))
> > And don't forget the WW2 guys probably have no body armor.
Trust me on this - WWII is a bloody thing when using SGII :-) It's good
fun
though - although we might be lowering the rifles FP to .5 instead of 1.
But if you use the conversion from http://www.l-25.demon.co.uk/ you will
end up loving MG's with belts (I know my opponent playing the russian side
hated
them - hehe).
Have fun.
LOL--definately no body armor for infantrymen.
other than a tin hat.
bolt action rifles are definately the lower of the to ratings.
also remember some Home Guard units were issued Martini-Henry breech
loading rifles from the 19th Century until enough bolt action rifles beame
available.
SMG rating LASERLIGHT offers is good.
closest thing to a SAW would be BREN guns, LEWIS guns, in the Regular Army or
Home Guards. or BARs.
you could use some really antique armored cars and tank, as well as
some armored vehicls hastily converted from civilian vehicles
usually farm tractors with boilerplate added.
some where i have seen a photograph of a Home Guard MG post coverng a stretch
of beach with an honest to GOD Victorian Army GATLING gun poking out of the
sandbags....
DAWGIE
> On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 09:53:00 +1000 , Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> I intend on mainly using my Dad's Army figs for FMA <they can be the
Hi, Beth.
I'm doing something similar, with a Call of Cthulhu slant, so I've walked a
little way down this path.
> Do bolt action rifles count as Low-Tech Assault Rifles or are they
I'm going to differ in opinion from the others who put bolt action rifles at
FP 0.5, and I'll give my reasons.
I believe a bolt action rifle should be FP 1.
If you were going to compare futuristic firepower to bolt action rifles, yes,
it should be FP 0.5 or even lower. However, this is in an environment where
NSL panzergrenadiers are completely encased in body armour. In WW2, you have
troops with no armour (except for aircraft crews, and I think some naval
crews) save a helmet.
So, here's the four point rationale for FP1 for bolt action rifles.
1. Firepower Drop Off due to Casualties.
Take a "standard" Regular German squad of 10 figures: 1 LMG, 1 LMG assistant,
a Squad Leader, and 7 riflemen. Assume for now that the SL has a rifle, not a
submachine gun. That gives you a D4 for firepower if you have 0.5 as the bolt
action rifle's firepower rating. If you lose a rifleman, the squad's firepower
die would be D4. If you lost 7 riflemen, the squad's firepower rating would be
D4. It doesn't change, because D4 is the minimum.
If you give them a FP1 for the rifle, you will see a steady decline in
firepower as a squad takes casualties. This is more realistic.
Of course, the decline ends after 4 riflemen are lost. I have a rule I
included in Hardtack to handle this issue. I called it the D2 Rule. If you
have a firepower total of 1 or 2, the result is a "D2". Of course, there is no
D2 in Stargrunt II. So, instead, if the firepower would result in a D2, treat
it as a D4 Open Shift down. That is, give the squad a D4, but increase the
range die of the target up one. This works well in regular SG2, too.
Example: a squad of Regular 4 riflemen (using FP1) firing at close range
against a squad in light cover. It would roll a D8 + D4 versus D6. If
the squad of riflemen took two casualties, they would have a D2 firepower.
Since you can't roll a "D2", the range die is shifted up one. They would roll
D8 +
D4 versus D8.
It's fairly easy to use in practice.
2. Weapon versus Armour and Cover Interaction
Yes, I know that Firepower is not used for armour penetration. However,
Firepower in SG2 determines the number of potential casualties. If you use FP
0.5 you end up with a lot of D4s being rolled, which will increase the number
of suppressions (and decrease the number potential casualties). Since WW2 was
usually fought with squads hugging cover, you're likely to get D6 and D8 range
dice rolls even firing at figures in the first range band.
You pretty much need a FP 1 on the rifle to get the kind of casualties you'd
expect in a WW2 firefight.
It also allows you to handle armour in a more flexible manner. Most soldiers
in WW2 were unarmoured. They usually had a helmet, but a lot of soldiers (red
beret paratroopers, commandoes, partisans) had no helmets at all. With a FP 1
firepower you can justify giving soldiers with steel pot helmets a D6 for
armour, non-helmeted soldiers a D4, and civilians the suggested "D1"
armour rating. FP 0.5 is low enough that you don't really want to give
helmeted figures a D6 armour; you wouldn't see enough casualties.
3. Weapon Flexibility
If you fix bolt action rifles at FP 0.5, you can't go any lower. The Lee
Enfield was an excellent rifle (my dad fired them in the late 50s, and he said
he was hitting -- virtually untrained -- bull's eyes at 300 yards with
iron sights). If you want to model some of the worse rifles of the era, you
don't get the chance as FP 0.5 is as low as you probably want to go. Also, I
have pistols as FP 0.5. It doesn't feel right to have FP 0.5 for bolt action
rifles.
Also, British soldiers had a high degree of marksmanship training. The Avalon
Hill game _Up Front_ gave them a firepower bonus based on this. If you
want to give them a bonus in SG2, you have a little more room to maneuver if
bolt action rifles start at FP1.
With this in mind, you can give M1 carbines an FP 1.5, and the early German
assault rifles an FP 2. This also gives you seeds of firepower ratings for
later conflicts. You can make the M-16 or AK-47 an FP 2 weapon, and the
M-16
with grenade launcher an FP3. Give G.I.'s in Vietnam a helmet (D6 armour) or
helmet and flak vest (D8 armour) and you have another era covered.
(For WW2, I'd even consider giving carbines FP 2 and the assault rifle FP 3,
but I think 1.5 and 2 is probably more accurate.)
4. Game Speed
This ties in with point 2. If you give rifles a FP 0.5, you'll end up with
lots of suppressions and fewer casualties. This means that there will be fewer
morale losses, more rolling for suppression removal, and a slower pace of the
game.
SG2 "feels" right when full squads are rolling QD + D8 to D12 + Support
Weapon Die. The pace drops considerably when the firepower die for the bulk of
the squad drops to D4, which is going to be the case in all but big Russian
squads if you use FP 0.5 for bolt action rifles.
> And the tommy guns are they OK to be treated just as SAWs? I guess
I wouldn't treat them as SAWs. You'd want to treat actual SAWs and LMGs as SG2
"SAWs".
I'd give them a FP of, say, 2. You could also argue for 1.5 (due to the lower
range than a rifle or even a carbine).
Technically they should have a range difference as well. This is going to be
hard to implement in a standard WW2 squad, where the Squad Leader has an SMG
(Thompson in Commonwealth and American forces).
Since a SAW should have a longer range than the bulk of the squad, don't worry
about it. Just give SMGs a FP of 2. If you have an entire squad made up of
SMGs, you might want to use a rule that I came up with for _Hardtack_:
shift
the range die up 1 -- before shifting for cover -- for every range band
other than the first.
Now, Bren guns, BARs, and other machine guns will be your support weapons.
I've been giving BARs a D6 support die, and a Bren should probably be in the
same range. I'd give them D8 but they were magazine, not belt, fed. You could
make an argument for D8, though.
A belt fed MG-34 on a bipod would be a D8 or D10. An MG-42 on a tripod
would be a D10 or D12. A tripod mounted vickers or.50 MG would be a D12. An
American.30 calibre MG would be in the D10 range.
> Going further back and thinking of WWI has anyone tried it in SG and if
What do you mean by "mad minute"?
> If you shift to a primarily infantry based force (just as a
Funny, I've been thinking of something similar! I haven't done any work on it
yet, though.
> On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 17:19:17 +1000 , Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> Bolt-action: FP:0.5 and I:d8 (though one dumb question... if a hunting
Okay, there's a fifth reason for FP 1. *L*
Allan Goodall schrieb:
[...lots of good suggestions snipped...]
> 2. Weapon versus Armour and Cover Interaction
Actually, from what I've read on WW2 infantry fights - both statistics
and stories from individual events - infantry casualties were quite low
compared to what you see in typical wargames. Especially in skirmish games
like Stargrunt where you have actual wounded and killed, rather than more
abstract 'casualties' to represent degraded performance.
On the other hand, soldiers were very quick to take cover when shot at.
If you accept this, high levels of suppressions and low actual casualties
would be the way to a realistic game.
Whether you like such a game is a different matter, see Allan's comments
below.
> 4. Game Speed
----
> A belt fed MG-34 on a bipod would be a D8 or D10. An
Perhaps there's a slight confusion here. You make it sound as if MG-34
is a bipod weapon and MG-42 tripod-mounted. Actually, the MG-42 was a
cheaper (but better !) replacement for the MG-34 model. Both could be
use on bipods or mounted on tripods or on vehicles. Firepower for both
should be equal. The MG-42 had a higher theoretical rate-of-fire but I
don't think this is relevant in game terms. I'm not sure its
bipod-mounted firepower should be better than that of a Bren or other
LMG. A higher FP dice is justified for tripod/vehicle mounted versions
due to the easier aiming and more continuous firing.
Is the D12 for a heavy.50 MG justified? I would tend to give it lower FP but
higher impact.
Greetings
Allan Goodall schrieb:
[...lots of good suggestions snipped...]
> 2. Weapon versus Armour and Cover Interaction
Actually, from what I've read on WW2 infantry firefights - both
statistics and stories from individual events - infantry casualties
were quite low compared to what you see in typical wargames. Especially in
skirmish games like Stargrunt where you have actual wounded and killed, rather
than more abstract 'casualties' to represent degraded performance.
On the other hand, soldiers were very quick to take cover when shot at.
If you accept this, high levels of suppressions and low actual casualties
would be the way to a realistic game.
Whether you like such a game is a different matter, as seen in the comments
below.
> 4. Game Speed
----
> A belt fed MG-34 on a bipod would be a D8 or D10. An
Perhaps there's a slight confusion here. You make it sound as if MG-34
is a bipod weapon and MG-42 tripod-mounted. Actually, the MG-42 was a
cheaper (but better !) replacement for the MG-34 model. Both could be
use on bipods or mounted on tripods or on vehicles. Firepower for both
should be equal. The MG-42 had a higher theoretical rate-of-fire but I
don't think this is relevant in game terms. I'm not sure it's
bipod-mounted firepower should be better than that of a Bren or other
LMG. A higher FP dice is justified for tripod/vehicle mounted versions
due to the easier aiming.
Is the D12 for a heavy.50 MG justified? I would tend to give it lower FP but
higher impact.
Greetings
On Tue, 04 Jun 2002 17:13:43 +0200 (CEST), KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de
wrote:
> Actually, from what I've read on WW2 infantry fights - both statistics
Part of my reasoning for higher casualties has to do with the morale system in
SG2, which feeds on casualties. Of course, I'd use the modified morale system
on my web site to make squads rout faster (which, in turn, brings the casualty
rate down).
If you have a lower FP rating, you end up with suppressions but not much else,
including a lowering of the morale state of the troops. A suppression only
nets one, easy Confidence Test per squad (the first time a squad is
suppressed).
However, you make an excellent point. Probably the most realistic method would
be to have lower FP, plus more morale checks (perhaps every time a unit is
suppressed).
> Perhaps there's a slight confusion here. You make it sound as if MG-34
Nope, I was just looking for another gun as an example. I realize that the 42
was the replacement for the 34 but that both were very similar in
rate-of-fire, impact, etc. I should have just kept things simpler by
saying
MG-34/42 in bipod is one FP, on tripod is another.
> Is the D12 for a heavy .50 MG justified ? I would tend to give it lower
On thinking about it, you're probably right. I'd keep it at about the same
level as the MG-34/42 but increase the impact. Good catch!
G'day,
> you could use some really antique armored cars and tank, as well as
Or in my case a butchers van. Which reminds me to ask whether anyone knows of
the manufacturer of such a vehicle. The Salute guys obviously did, do you have
any info on that St^3 Tuffley?
Cheers
G'day,
> And what would you say shouting distance should be?? (plz
6" is usually a good rule of thumb.
Cheers
G'day,
Thanks for all your help (and that goes for all of the rest of you too)
> What do you mean by "mad minute"?
The Brits regulars (at least) had had training to put down large volumes of
fire (30 shots) in a minute (which must have been amazing as they were using
bolt action rifles and would've done 3 mag changes by my figuring). Some of
the Germans who faced it assumed they must have some kind of machine gun or
something to put out that rate of fire, though it couldn't be kept up for
prolonged periods (as far as I know).
> Funny, I've been thinking of something similar! I haven't
Great minds then?;P;)
Cheers