From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 18:43:10 -0400
Subject: SG Great War (or the War To End All Wars... Almost)
Allan, Though I agree with your SG mechanics interpretation, you have two choices when statting out weapons/etc. 1) Reflect only one era. Full range of FP/IMP/ARM available for that use. 2) Reflect across genres. Limited (very) range of FP/IMP/ARM available for this use. Since Beth seems to want to do WW1 soldiers vs. 2183 Pzgd, the second strategy is mandated. Thus FP 0.5 for the bolt-action rifle (I'd give the well trained Brits 0.75). Thus also the D8 impact. And the suggestion of an armour upshift for modern 2183 armour. I give the tommy gun a d8 impact too, mostly because it is effective against unarmoured targets and if it hits an armoured one in a weak spot, a lot of pain can be inflicted. SG has no real equivalent of "armour penetration" (such as a modifier to armour from a given type of ammo, etc). I think WW1, you have: (These are from memory, so I may be wrong about when some of these came about) Lewis Gun (.303, about 33 (or some odd number) of rounds in the drum mag) SAW, FP: D6, IMP: D8 .303 Lee-Enfield Bolt-Action Rifle, FP: 0.5 (0.75 in the hands of great troops), IMP: D8.303 Vickers HMG (water cooled, crew served) HMG, FP: D10, IMP: D8 Mauser (or was it a Steyr Manlicher?) 7.92mm Bolt-Action Rifle Rifle, FP: 0.5, IMP: D8 Springfield 03, Bolt-Action Rifle, FP: 0.5, IMP: D10 Browning Automatic Rifle SAW, FP: D4, IMP: D10 Mosin-Nagant Bolt-Action Rifle, FP: 0.5, IMP: D8 Maxim (crew served, on a wheeled chassis) HMG, FP: D10, IMP: D8 Grenades: Work fairly well against unarmoured targets, but suffer the same armour modification as all WW1 weapons against ultramodern armour. Dud more often. Much of WW1 was close assault. This is how you got people out of another trench line. Artillery to suppress them, then a close assault. (against the enemy MGs.... OUCH). When in trenches, you'd get the benefits of IP and hard cover. No comms outside of 6". Pre-written orders from off board might be implemented. Individual officer initiative was not popular IIRC. Movement in no-man's land is impeded by obstacles and by mud. All such terrain should be treated as cultivated plus obstacles placed. And mines and unexploded munitions pose a threat. ChemWar attacks in this period are fairly lethal if the wind is right (depending on mask quality/actual date of operation). Machineguns and artillery were used a lot in conjunction with fixed defenses. TacAir was Recce and later some limited bombing. Mad Minute: FP 1.0 for all rifles, after one turn of such fire FP drops to 0.5 until resupplied. Helmet is effectively "no armour" (give it a D6 if feeling very generous). Full sapper armour is D8 probably. Much artillery and supply was horse drawn. Mishaps in mud can swallow soldiers whole. No night vision gear except Starshells. Artillery, though not as accurate, is probably reasonably effective. Smoke really does obscure as no one can see through it. Casualty rolls should be at -1 just due to awful conditions. A medic can only offset the conditions....:( (Waltzing Matilda.... Waltzing Matilda...) Tanks should move 6" or 2d6", have armour 1, and be prone to getting stuck. Attacks from tanks are all carried out with D4 Fire Control (primitive). Weapons tend to include 2 x HMG or HMG plus a CPR gun, probably class 1 or 2. Mike Elliot's KEC isn't a bad simulation of these. Versus Modern: No comms will get through for the low-techs. Period. In fact, fake orders can probably be easily substituted/created. Modern armour gets a 1UP shift to represent the age differences. FP tends to be higher, units smaller and more flexible. Vehicles are much more dangerous and flexible. Troops have more variety (sniper rifles, IAVRs, PIGs, etc). Tactical Nighmares: Close assault is done with straight 6" movement (4" in churned/muddy ground) in line (NOT COMBAT MOVEMENT) in early war. Enemy can be given FDF if movement is more than one move. (Machineguns especially). This leads to mass casualties in assaults early on. Vermin, disease, and water in the mud (as well as carrion) leads to fatigue and reduced starting morales for scenarios. (Shellshock anyone?). Orders are given, followed, and pass or fail with little on-site battle management. More troops are thrown in rather than altering tactics. Artillery is used extensively to prepare positions (to not a lot of effect), as counter-battery, or to destroy advancing enemy forces (very effective). The other Big One: WW2 is a different kettle of fish. I've run some WW2 SG2 battles and find it pretty much like vanilla SG minus the comms. Of course, then we enter divisive arguments about vehicle quality etc.... (NO THAT IS NOT AN INVITATION PLEASE AND THANK YOU). So I'll leave this one alone. Nudge me next week to send you my WW2 conversion.