SG2, using jetbikes in stargrunt.

I use the Mike Broadbents jetbikes,and find a strange quirk in the rules.

If you use them as light horse (dismountable), while mounted,they ignore
suppression,but when they dismount, they inherit all of their suppressions.

This males their use as dismounted troops extramly hard.

> I use the Mike Broadbents jetbikes,and find a strange quirk in the

Can someone post these or, even better, send them to direct to me so I can
include them on the Unofficial Stargrunt II Web Site?

Thanks in advance!

Hi, Does anyone have any rules for using jetbikes in Stargrunt. This has
probably come up before so a quick point in the direction to finding something
is all I need.

Hmm, Darryl, whilst mounted the troopies do take the suppressions into
account. For one thing they can't dismount suppressed??

[quoted original message omitted]

I thought of that Owen, but then its gets sillier.

Any smart player would take pot shots at the just so they can not dismount,
thus invalidating the purpose of the troops.The only way is to withdraw from
combat ro find cover.

Maybe it is the way I use them, but I use them to get units to advantagous
places on the field. Unless there is lots of covor, just 1 suppression HURTS.

The best way to use them, is to allow them to dismount while suppress (any
idiot can dsimount a bike, an APC is alot harder).

There is IMHO a good need for cavalry rules for SGII, something for Bugs Dont
Surf??

Darryl

> Glover, Owen wrote:

> Hmm, Darryl, whilst mounted the troopies do take the suppressions into

> You wrote:

> Any smart player would take pot shots at the just so they can not

I'd make it worse than that. I'd let the effects of the supression
take effect as if they were infantry--after all, these bikers are not
exactally protected by armor.

> Maybe it is the way I use them, but I use them to get units to

Ideally, mounted infantry should use the bikes for operational and tactical
mobility before entering combat. IOW, you get there quickly, then dismount to
fight. I've never heard of a mounted infantry unit dismounting under fire
deliberately (ie as part of their plan). You either get off when you get to
the scene of the fight (see: Buford's Cavalry Brigade at Gettysburg) or your
CO makes the determination that the battle will be fought mounted (As in the
Light Horse charge that was obviously the inspiration for this whole thing in
the first place).

> The best way to use them, is to allow them to dismount while suppress

It's not a matter of "hard"--dismounting an APC is easy.  It's a matter
of it's dangerous out there, and the APC provides an illusion of security.

> There is IMHO a good need for cavalry rules for SGII, something for

How about double all rolls for shooting at cavalry units, but the mounts and
riders are seperate for determining shooting. Horses run about naked, but
since I'm generous I'll give them a d4 armor. If you can FIND an SF Barded
horse miniature, you can make up all the rules you like 'bout it. Mounted
units never recieve cover bonuses nor go in position while mounted. They are
also counted as one range category closer 'coz horses are big. If a man's
horse is shot out from under him, roll on following chart: d6 1 KIA
2-3 Wounded (White Skull)
4-5 Stunned--no further actions this turn
6 Fine. Any soldier loosing three or more mounts in a single action and
rolling 6s must have an epic poem composed about them.

This simple rule modification will soon cure any idiots out there of trying to
carry out a sabre charge. This isn't Napoleonics
gaming--anyone deliberately planning charges on horseback into
automatic weapons fire should be shot for incompetence.

And yes, I know the Aussies did it Palestine. The Turks also messed up the
sights on their weapons so that most of the ground covered was not actually
under fire. I can recall exactally three other instances after the widespread
introduction of automatic weapons where cavalry charges carried against
infantry. Plus the wierdness of 1920, wherein
Budenny's Cavalry Army engaged a simillar-sized formation of Polish
cavalry including volunteers composed of noblemen with their fedual retainers,
a scene straight out of the Middle Ages. But neither side was what I'd
consider heavily equipped with modern weapons. Of the other three, two were
carried out against infantry moving from a march column to a fighting
formation, and the last was against the Japanese, not a real leader in the
automatic weapons category either. You do it
against 4 gauss rifles (w/20mm grenade launchers) and a pair of Gauss
SAWs, then you'll end up terminally embarassed.

> You wrote:

Just a thought (not an [OFFICIAL] idea...) - if jetbike troops take a
suppression while mounted, do an immediate reaction test (TL to be
determined - ideas?) - if they pass, then they can continue moving, if
they
fail then the have to do a "crash dismount" - get the bikes on the deck
fast, probably with a risk of damaging some of them, and riders roll off into
whatever cover is available?

> John Atkinson wrote:
Plus the wierdness of 1920, wherein
> Budenny's Cavalry Army engaged a simillar-sized formation of Polish

What was this? Something from the tail end of the Russian Civil War?

> You wrote:

> Plus the wierdness of 1920, wherein

Nope. Poland invaded Soviet Union in alliance with Lithuanians and Ukranians.
Took Kiev, lost Kiev, got pushed back almost to Warsaw, and then destroyed the
Red Army in a pair of titanic battles. They were probably the most significant
battles in this century, but the least
well-known.  Had Poland falled, there would be nothing in disarmed and
demoralized Germany that could have slowed them down, and contemporary writers
speculated on whether the French could have convinced their
army to fight, as heavily ridden with pro-Communist sentiment as it
was. Had the Poles not stood, the entire continent could have been Communist
by the end of 1921.

Where would I find these rules for Mike Broadbents jetbikes??????

I'm writing some up myself and would like to see what has already been done.
If I like what someone else has done I'll use them instead.

Wayne.

> Darryl wrote:

> The best way to use them, is to allow them to dismount while suppress

Never having had any form of actual combat experience or training, I think
than John (Atkinson) has a good understanding of why troops cannot dismount
an APC while it is supressed - The illusion of safety. Sometimes it is
more than just an illusion, but considering the lethality of future weaponry,
it
often is just that - an illusion.

Moving on to the jetbike troops, I think they would be aware of the total
lack of "protection" provided by the bikes - The best safety they can
afford is speed and mobility. Shooting getting a bit too crazy? Then move
elsewhere. It would seem more risky to dismount in many cases. I think that it
would be hard to come up with a good generalized rule.

How about something like this (hard to implement, but an idea nonetheless)

If they are under attack by anti-vehicular weapons they must test to
dismount (leave the speed that will protect them) but can continue to operate
mounted. If under attack by volume fire (saw, etc...) then you
must test to stay mounted like Jon (GZG) proposed - it is essentially a
high-flak environment that is especially dangerous to operate in.

Anyway, the idea is Volume of fire. Anti vehicular seems to be less volume
but higher lethality, anti-personnel the opposite.

What do you think?

In Dirtside we use the Imperial Speeder Bikes as armor zero vehicles. Because
of their small size they are hard to hit, but impact is usually lethal. I like
to use them because their fast speed and maneuverability combined
with a DFFG/1 is very usefull against enemy armour.
In StarGrunt we just give them a D6 armour like any other lightly armoured
vehicle.  My Scouts don't abandon their bikes but they might piggy-back
another scout squad and drop them off. Phil P.

Gort, Klaatu barada nikto!

> Ground Zero Games wrote:

> Just a thought (not an [OFFICIAL] idea...) - if jetbike troops take a

I like it. ALL HAIL JON!

BTW, do people use each jet bike as 1 organic unit,or each bike as a seperate
vehical?