SG2 forces

3 posts ยท Mar 21 2001 to Mar 22 2001

From: Barclay, Tom <tomb@b...>

Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 18:46:39 -0500

Subject: SG2 forces

Derk said:

Just thinking about the number of minimi's, I recall the bravo-two-zero
distribution. 8 men, 4 M16/203, 4 Minimi. It's a thought for how to run
special forces type operations.

==> As our resident spec ops vet, Los took great pains to point out to me how
overloaded these guys were with kit (now he didn't specifically refer to the
weapons loadout, so I'm perhaps inferring something untrue). If you are
on a sneak and peak or a sneak and blow-sh*t-up mission, it is important
to be armed to protect yourself, but that might have been overkill. Perhaps
more of them would have gotten away from their firefights if they hadn't been
lugging everything under the sun (even after they lost their initial kit). The
other issue is of course that they were badly prepared and allowed
that to happen (their comms setup/etc).

Then again, with special forces, you could make a case for running them as 8
individuals.

==> I've run FMAS "SF escort the dissident out of country" with a platoon
pursuing 8 SF elites (elite/vet mix) and their scientist/dissident. It
was bloody, but they succeeded in the mission, losing 5 of 8 SF soldiers, and
only due to the fact the enemy aggressively attacked, close assaulting and
destroying their reargaurd in the last couple of turns so they could take
the "river/border" crossing under fire. The SF soldiers then bravely
sacrificed themselves to suck up enemey overwatch fire until the enemy had
mostly shot off, and then they ran the scientist across. I think 2 SF were
captured, 2 or 3 escaped, the others were killed. The scientist got away.

==> I've also run SF in small 4 man squads vs. other troops in SG. So it will
work there too.

==> SG lets you do a lot of things because it is a semi-realistic
portrayal of the world. (semi!). You don't have points to restrict you because
such systems can be flawed. (Frankly, without any bias ahead of time, I expect
the FMAS point system to be flawed regardless of how well they work
it...
DS2 is good, but has problems... and FMAS has far more variables....). It
makes the game harder to setup for new folks (hard to gauge equality), but
once you get playing 4 or 5 games, you get a feel for things. And in the real
world, you could have 8 SAWs.... you'd just need to have a truck following you
with ammo....

==> Note in FMAS, we've talked about limiting the SAW by imposing a movement
penalty (even the newer ones aren't that light... and if you are loaded up
with ammo too...) especially considering the gyroharnesses and stuff we can
see on most GZG figs. Assume that the movement rate for troops in SG accounts
for "waiting for the SAW or GMS" whereas in FMAS, that is more of a thinking
action.

==> Plus, if you shoot half decently with a rifle, and you actually want to
hit something, you'd prefer a rifle. The SAW is great for sustained area fire,
but accuracy is the bane of MGs and SAWs. The Bren was probably only a
mediocre LMG because of its low mag cap and its accuracy.... you want to
suppress an area or engage waves of targets with a SAW. If you want to hit a
small target, get a rifle... this is part of what limits squads in real
life...

From: Barclay, Tom <tomb@b...>

Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:17:23 -0500

Subject: SG2 forces

Derk wrote (in response to my bit below):

> ==> GMS/P rules! - and here is why: Play on a big board some time. The

True. You'd need to be doing Desert warfare, though;) Most terrain would not
allow many such shots, I'd think?

==> Not really. Just a big board. Try looking at
http://www.warpfish.com/jhan/ft/gzgecc/gzgecc3/gallery/S3_GreyDay05.jpg
just
as an example. Even normal battlefields can have some clear table-length
firelanes. Now, if you were in the desert without too many high dunes, you'd
have nothing _but_ table length fire lanes. I think on most non-forest
or
non-jungle or non-swamp tables you could draw at least some lines longer
than 40" (the limit of IAVRs for regs) and definitely the missile will be more
accurate (assuming average guidance and ECM) out past about 24".

==> I played one game with OUDF fleeing in some APCs (some damaged) vs. FSE
and PAU (high adrian). They ended up abandoning all their vehicles, but
during that game there were 27 GMS/P shots fired, of which (counting
ECM, heavy EW presence for the OUDF, and bad luck on penetration rolls), 3 hit
to effect. But they did their job....

From: Derk Groeneveld <derk@c...>

Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 21:10:02 +0100 (CET)

Subject: Re: SG2 forces

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Barclay, Tom wrote:

> Derk wrote (in response to my bit below):
The
> > unlimited range/no range mods is pretty darn good. If I can shoot
http://www.warpfish.com/jhan/ft/gzgecc/gzgecc3/gallery/S3_GreyDay05.jpg
just
> as an example. Even normal battlefields can have some clear

Maybe. But on the other hand, most tabletop battlefields tend to be far too
sparse in terrain clutter. At least for 'european' scenarios they seem to be.

> ==> I played one game with OUDF fleeing in some APCs (some damaged)
vs. FSE
> and PAU (high adrian). They ended up abandoning all their vehicles,

1 out of 9? Sounds like serious bad luck!

Cheers,