I really must take exception with Owen's inference that using a sniper to get
suppressions goes against the 'spirit of the game.'
In a scenario my group was playing, my platoon was charged with blunting a
large recon patrol while a counter attack was forming.
One of my objectives was to 'slow,' i.e. suppress, as many attacking units as
possible. So, if I needed to pin down a squad at the edge of a heavy forest,
you're right, I would have my sniper put a round over their heads to make
them, "keep their heads down."
Even if he couldn't get a kill, he might save the butt of one of his buddies
by limiting that squads options.
Thanks anyway.
Kevin, Here's how our house rules handle the sniper situation. First, we don't
allow the sniper to score an automatic suppression. Nothing in combat is
automatic, so we rule that the range die must be at least twice the value on
the highest die rolled by the sniper to avoid suppression. Otherwise, sniper
fire causes suppression. We also used open die shifts for small arms fire. If
you have to shift the range die above d12, first shift the firepower die down
one die type. Once the firepower die has been shifted down to d4, do the same
for the quality die. Once get both the firepower and quality dice to d4, you
can't shift any further and no shots are possible. This has a very interesting
effect. Beyond a certain range, the quality die of the sniper begins to drop.
This results in a greater chance for the sniper to roll of '1' on the quality
die, thus revealing his position. Of course, this is in addition to making the
shot that much more difficult, and if you use the first house rule listed,
makes it less and less likely that the sniper will have any effect. Having
said all that, I must say that if you're shooting at a target with absolutely
no chance to hit, not even a game mechanism for it, I'd have a hard time
explaining how you'd cause suppression.
-Mike
> Cleats Balentine wrote:
> I really must take exception with Owen's inference
Kevin,
I think what Owen meant is that a real sniper would never do that. If a
sniper does not have a shot then he/she will not give away their
position just to "Put a round over the head of the enemy". The fact that it
can be done is a problem with the rules (or someone playing the rules and not
the game).
i understand your need to slow down that patrol but in reality if you wanted
them to deploy that far out you would use some fire support to do it.
Magic.
[quoted original message omitted]
> "Glover, Owen" wrote:
> Anyway, the original question was about a sniper taking a shot that
Agreed. This is what I was saying in my previous post. If you don't roll any
dice, no shot is fired. The rules as written state on p.27 "When a sniper
fires, the shot is resolved in a similar way to the nomral firing process for
a support or heavy weapon,..." Per p.37 "[Support weapon fire is resolved
exactly as for the normal squad fire procedure..." Finally p.33 "Small arms
fire is effective up to the
point where the RANGE DIE would be GREATER than a D12 - whenthis limit
is reached then effective small arms fire is impossible." In other words, you
don't roll any dice and you don't get any shots.
-Mike
Well, I'm glad we got a little more commentary on this subject.
As a refresher, we were discussing whether sniper fire at targets past the
fifth range band or in extreme cover (i.e. beyond a d12 range die) were
subject to an automatic supression when fired at by a sniper.
My question related to a specific set of circumstances from one scenario in
our loose campaign. Given the assets I had from the scenario, including a
sniper, I tried to win the engagement.
The situation that prompted my original question came up just once, and I
opted not to fire because the target was beyond my sniper's range. I call that
'trying to play the spirit of the game.' :-)
I was wondering what everyone else did in these situations because they
weren't covered in the book.
Since the sniper was one of my assets, I tried to use him in a way that fit
the scenario. If you've ever seen me roll dice, you know I'm much more likely
to get a simple suppression with a sniper than even an indiscriminate kill.
Since our games rarely feature high-powered generals
leading their forces from the front or anything higher than company level, is
it the list consensus that snipers wouldn't be used at all?
My group doesn't have house rules for "Sharpshooters," but if somebody could
direct me to some I would be happy to take a look at them.
Please don't take my comments as negative. Seems like you followed the rules
of the game and the spirit of the rules.
A sniper team could be assigned to a company team. Certainly depends on the
situation.
Magic
[quoted original message omitted]
Suppressing the enemy is one of the most common sniper tasks in a
multi-force
situation. Often snipers are used to hold up the enemy, especially to tie them
down to permit heavier assets to hit them.
OTOH it seems wrong to permit them to get an automatic suppression even though
they couldn't get a decent shot in.
May I suggest the automatic suppression is an option that can only be taken if
there was a chance of getting a shot in, but must be taken instead of the
shot.
---
Steve Gill Steve@caws.demon.co.uk
http://www.caws.demon.co.uk/
> -----Original Message-----
> Steve Gill wrote:
> May I suggest the automatic suppression is an option that can only be
Steve, I'd like to hear more, how would you change the rest of the sniper
rules? The rules as written give automatic suppression for each sniper shot
fired, regardless of the roll. Further, only minor success is needed to hit a
member of the the target squad. How would you handle squads that are receiving
sniper fire but have not been hit?
-Mike
My idea is roughly that you have decide up front whether you are firing for
effect or suppression.
If suppression you don't make the roll, the target unit is suppressed.
If effect you roll as usual to cause damage. There'd have to be some sort of
quality check to see if the target unit was suppressed or not if there was a
hit, it would be modified by the quality of the hit.
---
Steve Gill Steve@caws.demon.co.uk
http://www.caws.demon.co.uk/
> -----Original Message-----
> Steve Gill wrote:
> My idea is roughly that you have decide up front whether you are
OK, how would you handle that? If you're going to work it that way, why not
just treat sniper shots like every other small arms fire roll, i.e. minor
success is suppression and major success is a hit plus suppression?
-Mike
> > -----Original Message-----
I have to wonder if a single innaccurate shot is going to come close to
supressing a unit. If a single shot happens and noone is hit, why would the
unit get suppressed (unless they are reall really green and panic)?
Now, if the LT of RaTelO gets nailed in the head, I'd expect to see everyone
jumping for cover and trying to get under rocks and stuff. Then looking for
where it came from.
I'd say its a chance, not an automatic suppression. A veteran unit is going to
be more likely to figure out where the sniper is and then start
working to a better position to flank the guy.
Or an elite unit will take up firing positions and put two rounds through the
sniper's head.
Jon
[quoted original message omitted]
> Ryan M Gill wrote:
This is the whole point of what I'm suggesting. If the sniper team fires for
effect the target unit has to test to see if they are suppressed or not.
> I'd say its a chance, not an automatic suppression. A veteran unit is
Unless the sniper specifically places shots to suppress them. When using
suppressive fire you are firing more than one shot, but specifically placing
them to make the target unit think that wherever they go and whatever they do
they will be hit.
Usually suppressive fire is used after firing for effect has already made them
suppressed, it just keeps them that way.
---
> Michael Sarno wrote:
> > My idea is roughly that you have decide up front whether you are
It'd probably work just fine like that, no rulebook with me up here though so
I'm unsure of any modifiers that might help.
The point is to prevent snipers getting free suppression without cost -
i.e.
they only get the guaranteed suppression if they decide not to inflict
casualties.
---
> Steve Gill wrote:
> The point is to prevent snipers getting free suppression without cost
Fair enough, but what about the suggestion I made a few days ago? What we've
been doing is ignoring the suppression effect when the range die roll is at
least twice the sniper's highest die roll. In those cases, the shot is just so
poorly placed, the target isn't even suppressed.
-Mike
> On 15-Dec-99 at 10:57, Michael Sarno (msarno@ptdprolog.net) wrote:
What
> we've
You know, I don't think a sniper would get a suppression with a laser unless
he hit something. It's hard to suppress someone who doesn't realize they've
been shot at.
Of course, there's always the lasers designed to make noise.
> Roger Books wrote:
> You know, I don't think a sniper would get a suppression with a laser
Interesting point. Even if he did hit there's not much chance of getting a
suppression on a unit unless there's some pretty spectacular special effects
when the target gets hit.
With a modern day rifle there's all that blood and stuff to let people know
that it's dangerous, and a far away report to let you know how far away the
shooter really was. If all you've got is young Timmy quietly falling over
there isn't anything to cause the need to hit cover.
> Of course, there's always the lasers designed to make noise.
Which implies a sniper laser has to be tweaked to make sure it causes special
effects in order to be efficient.
---
> Davis, Jonathan E wrote:
> Or an elite unit will take up firing positions and
Not too likely given that snipers tend to fire from out of range of normal
weapons (and way beyond the range at which you stand a chance of seeing them).
Any unit stupid enough to simply assume firing positions against a sniper
deserves to be removed from the gene pool.
---
On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:26:04 -0000, "Steve Gill"
<Steve@caws.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Not too likely given that snipers tend to fire from out of range of
That certainly wasn't the case during World War II, for the most part. I think
this brings in the distinction, though, of elite assassin type snipers versus
"lone, almost regular soldier" snipers that made up the majority of "snipers"
during the Second World War.
On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:25:54 -0000, "Steve Gill"
<Steve@caws.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Interesting point. Even if he did hit there's not much chance of
Well, let's forget for a moment that a laser is a lousy weapon (too much
energy focused on a tiny spot on the body)...
> With a modern day rifle there's all that blood and stuff to let people
I disagree. Seeing young Timmy fall over dead as if from magic, without any
idea of how close or far away the shooter was, or even the direction, is apt
to unnerve a squad just the same (if not more so) than seeing Timmy's head
explode once he looks over the lip of a trench. Was the sniper in front of
Timmy? Behind? Above? Don't know when it's a laser shot... at least not
immediately.
On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:54:31 -0500, Michael Sarno <msarno@ptdprolog.net>
wrote:
> Fair enough, but what about the suggestion I made a few days ago?
What we've
> been doing is ignoring the suppression effect when the range die roll
How about my rules interpretation, based on my reading of the rules, that a
shot beyond a D12 range band is impossible, even for a sniper?
I wish Jon would make an appearance and clear this up! *L*
> Allan Goodall wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 10:54:31 -0500, Michael Sarno
What we've
> >been doing is ignoring the suppression effect when the range die roll
Allan, that really doesn't address the problem, though. We've been talking
about ways to get around the AUTOMATIC suppression of a sniper's target.
> I wish Jon would make an appearance and clear this up! *L*
I don't think that's necessary. The rules are quite clear and we have a
consensus on the list: the rules do not allow sniper fire beyond the D12 range
die.
-Mike
On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 21:33:53 -0500, Michael Sarno <msarno@ptdprolog.net>
wrote:
> Allan, that really doesn't address the problem, though. We've been
Oops. That's what I get for reading the list when I have a bad head cold! *L*
I thought the problem was whether automatic suppression could occur beyond the
furthest range band.
I really don't have a problem with the automatic suppression. Based on what
I've read about World War 2 combat, it seems reasonable.
But don't mind me... it's the Dristan talking! *L*
> Or an elite unit will take up firing positions and
Well, er, not to get too picky <g>, but when Michael Rose assumed command of
UN forces in Sarajevo a few years back, he requested and received SAS
counter-sniper teams who's job was to sneak about hunting the snipers
that were plaguing the city. Military snipers tend to shoot from out of
"normal
every- day rifle" range, but if your elite unit is set up to snipe
snipers, they'll either get themselves some kind of positional advantage, or
have
the right equipment, or both. I think that's what he meant - the elite
unit by virtue of their being elite, and not dummies, wouldn't "take up firing
positions" in a place that they wouldn't have any chance of doing what they
are setting out to do...
This has been an interesting thread, by the way.
Tom and I spent quite a while discussing Marksmen vs. Snipers about 6 months
ago, and I've used Marksmen extensively in SG games. Works really well when
you use them simply as another support weapon in the rifle unit (though I give
them the double range bands). They have the choice of either firing WITH the
squad's fire, in which case they just add their firepower die to the squad's
fire (as with any other support weapon), but in this case they don't get any
range advantages, OR they fire separately with the squad's quality, their
weapon's firepower, and double rangebands. They don't get the "pick your
target" bonuses of Snipers, or the movement and hiding bonuses. Keeps it
simple, and works fast without making them too powerful.
Tom covered numbers well in his response to the question about how many to
allow. I'll add that from my experience using this system, having a couple in
a platoon size formation is plenty, unless you are setting up a special
scenario OR are using one side as a specialist formation. For example, I
played a great game vs. Tom and several of his friends where I was a slightly
reinforced NAC platoon, fighting against a mech company defending a "planetary
defence grid operations HQ bunker". The longer I held out, the more ships I
got off planet in my retreat from his implacable advance, and that would be
relevant later in the FT scenario that was to follow. That kind of scenario is
one in which having more marksmen rather than less is fine. If you're just
playing the ordinary "meeting engagement" type of scenario with roughly equal
forces, then keep the numbers of Marksmen down,
or you'll end up in a long-range sniper duel and the game gets bogged
down and boring...
In my NAC units (I play NAC Light Infantry, not NAC Marines, and the TOE I use
is up on Ted Arlauskas' TOE webpage (great resource, by the way:
http://www.naxera.com/ted/gzg.html)), I often use a marksmen team of two
troops as a separate element at the Platoon level. They act as a separate
"squad" and can be reactivated, etc by the platoon commander, but are a
unit of two troops only - a "marksman" and a "spotter" who carries a
regualar AR and a laser target designator (which almost never comes into game
play, but that's the figure I use...:). They use the Marksmen rules, and not
the sniper rules, and it works well. But as Tom said, having Marksmen as part
of squads works well also. Another friend has his FSE Legionaires with a
marksman in each squad (like 2REP now), and that is cool too. Makes the squads
rather powerful, but that's ok 'cause we compensate in other ways for balance
when setting up scenarios.
Anyway, there's my $0.02 to this thread...
> Allan, that really doesn't address the problem, though. We've
*L*
> I thought the problem was whether automatic suppression could occur
Hope you're better soon:)
I agree - I don't have a problem with the automatic suppression rule
either. I follow that up by saying that I almost never use the actual sniper
rules in a SG game, and when I do, they are entirely driven by the scenario. I
never allow snipers as per the rules to appear in an
"ordinary" game - since I'm of the Canadian/UK/Australian "snipers are a
specially trained element available at battalion level or above" school of
thought. Now, I add in my whole discussion on Marksmen here at the same time,
though (I discuss this in my last post, as did Tom Barclay,
yesterday/the day before). The marksmen rules we propose account for
the "better than average rifleman who is told to go off and be a sniper"
situation, and take care of the complaints about "automatic supression" (gets
rid of it all together, actually) in most games, other than ones in which, for
scenario driven reasons, you bring in "SNIPERS" in all their glory and with
all the rules as written.
Hopefully this accomodates everyone and doesn't require more complexity than
necessary, but then again, if that were the case this list wouldn't be any fun
and we'd have nothing to debate:)
OK, I'm replying to my own post, but I reread it after receiving it, and
realized I was a wee bit unclear <g>
> Tom covered numbers well in his response to the question about how many
just to clarify (not that it *really* matters, but... <g>)
I was a platoon defending the HQ bunker against a mech company. I was not a
platoon attacking a company defending an HQ bunker, which is how it
sounds when I re-read it.... <g>
> Allan Goodall wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Dec 1999 21:33:53 -0500, Michael Sarno
No worries. We STARTED with that discussion, but for the past few days have
been talking about the automatic suppression effect.
> I really don't have a problem with the automatic suppression. Based on
I just don't like anything being a "sure thing" in my wargames. That's why I
personally don't like the automatic suppression. That's why we ignore the
"automatic" suppression if the range die roll exceeds the sniper's highest
roll by at least double. That way, the sniper can really screw up, and nothing
is guaranteed.
> But don't mind me... it's the Dristan talking! *L*
I hope you get better soon. Either that or upgrade to codeine. <g>
-Mike