One thing happened in my playtest game that I wanted to bring up.
What do you do when a vehicle carrying passengers is destroyed or disabled? Do
you let the passengers bail out for free, or make them wait for their
activation? Do you require them to bail out?
The reason I ask is that the rules are very vague on this point. There are a
couple of references to the crew or passengers escaping unscathed, but it's
unclear if this means that they literally escape the vehicle, or if they
simply "escape harm".
There's also a question of whether or not the occupants take a suppression
marker. The rules state that a vehicle hit by fire takes a suppression marker
which prevents occupants from escaping. What happens
if shrapnel flies through the vehicle on a disable/destroyed result?
I don't like letting the occupants bail out of the vehicle for free. On the
other hand, it seems weird making them stay in the vehicle until their next
activation. Say an APC with a squad is activated early in a turn. Both the APC
and the squad have been activated. The APC is destroyed, and the squad takes
casualties. They would sit in the burning vehicle for the rest of the turn.
Not only that, but if they were badly mauled the player may have them activate
last in the next turn. It just seems wrong that they'd be sitting in the
burning vehicle for the better part of 10 minutes
After thinking about it, here's the situation we came up with:
- On a non-penetrating hit, the vehicle takes a suppression marker, as
per the rules. The occupants can not leave until this is removed.
- On a penetrating hit that destroys the vehicle, the occupants test for
casualties as normal. They immediately bail out of the vehicle 6 inches, but
they are given a suppression result. [The suppression makes up for the "free"
unloading action.]
- On a penetrating hit that disables the vehicle, the occupants test for
casualties as normal. The squad may bail out as per a destroyed vehicle, and
are given a suppression result. On a successful Confidence Test of
1/2/4 for high/med/low motivation troops, the squad may stay in the
disabled vehicle instead of bailing out, but they still receive a suppression
marker.
How does that sound? In practice all the squads bailed out.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
My suggestion would have been more simple.
On a non-penetrating the vehicle recieves a suppression marker. If
the crew/passengers wish to leave the vehicle, they also are treated
as if they have a suppression marker.
On a penetrating hit, the vehicle (if not destroyed), passengers and
crew each recieve a suppression marker. The player/team MUST activate
this unit (crew/passengers) next.
- ---
Brian Bell bbell1@insight.rr.com ICQ: 12848051 AIM: Rlyehable YIM: Rlyehable
The Full Thrust Ship Registry:
http://www.ftsr.org
- ---
- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[mailto:owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU]On Behalf Of
agoodall@canada.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 17:10
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: [SG2] Vehicle Bail Out
One thing happened in my playtest game that I wanted to bring up.
What do you do when a vehicle carrying passengers is destroyed or disabled? Do
you let the passengers bail out for free, or make them wait for their
activation? Do you require them to bail out?
[snip]
How does that sound? In practice all the squads bailed out.
> On Wed, 04 July 2001, "Brian Bell" wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
The only problem is that it violates the rule that a suppression marker on a
vehicle or building doesn't allow the occupants to exit the vehicle or
building! (For buildings, the rules suggest putting the suppression marker on
one wall or side of the structure).
> On a penetrating hit, the vehicle (if not destroyed), passengers and
I'm not crazy about "must activate next" rules, just as a personal preference.
In message <20010705155256.9824.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>, agoodall@canada.com
wri tes:
> The only problem is that it violates the rule that a suppression
Just my opinion, but I've always immediately placed the passengers outside the
vehicle with a suppression marker. Never really thought twice about it.
> At 8:52 AM -0700 7/5/01, agoodall@canada.com wrote:
I'm still new to Stargrunt but I've done a lot of study of infantry and armour
tactics so I'll take a stab at some of this. Mostly I'm thinking in real
principles here and trying to get 'game' and 'real' to meet in the middle.
I think the thing you're trying to model is the fact that a armoured vehicle
takes a hit. Normally the crew would be staying buttoned up. But, there is now
a hole in the side of the vehicle the systems are down, the engine is smoking
and one or more of the crew are dead. Time to get out before the fire reaches
the magazine's or worse the fuel cell and the vehicle brews up. Screw the
chance of getting killed, the thing may blow up. So the crew bail out. They
leave by roof hatches or by side doors or whatever. Their concern is getting
out of the vehicle no matter what.
I guess it all really depends on if the vehicle is just disabled or really
well worked over by the penetrating round. If its just disabled they can take
their time. If its holed then they want out now.
In both situations they count as being suppressed. In the case of the "RIGHT
NOW!", the crew bailing are naturally immediately suppressed (perhaps doubly
so, ie two suppression markers?). They aren't going to be doing much for a
little while anyhow.
A correct anti-armour drill by a pair of teams would have a SAW and a
GMS system of some sort (perhaps IAVRs) destroying/damaging it. The
bailing out crew is then shot by an additional SAW team. The presence of the
SAW then provides additional suppression and kills on the
vehicle as the crew bails out of the dying tank/MICV.
Immediately after the Penetrating hit is reached... Surviving crew gets placed
d6" away from the vehicle in a circle. They receive 2 suppression markers.
This takes place immediately after the
resolution. An anti-armour team up close in an ambush that took out
the vehicle with its first activation would then have a second activation to
shoot at the crew as they bail out with SAWs and other small arms.
The intra-activation bail out action may be a bit much, but seems to
model the effects of a vehicle getting worked over by an anti-armour
team. Naturally their ability to kill the armour crew/passengers is
up to their abilities as a team. They may end up placing an
additional suppression marker on the crew/passengers or may end up
killing more. If the shot was from longer range, then its likely they are able
to escape the vehicle and find the nearest hole to hide in before looking
around at their buddies and figuring out who is hurt then taking care of them.
> On Thu, 05 July 2001, Andy Cowell wrote:
> Just my opinion, but I've always immediately placed the passengers
That's how I was taught. Maybe it's just a common sense thing, but I honestly
thought that was in the rules until I couldn't find it written specifically.
I use that ruling, but in the recent playtest there was a situation where a
player didn't want to abandon a disabled vehicle. It got me thinking about
whether or not it should be required for a disabled vehicle, or just for
destroyed vehicles.
> I'm still new to Stargrunt but I've done a lot of study of infantry
Might depend on how disabled and what opposition is. If it's a lucky with with
IAVR on a tread and there are machine gun rounds boucing off my hull, I might
be inclined to stay put; if it's a penetrating hit and something's on fire,
I'll be more inclined to teleport out even if it's into someone's fire lane.
IIRC an M1 in Iraq was disabled (stuck in mud) and accounted for three Iraqi
tanks before the recovery vehicles managed to get it unstuck.
> A correct anti-armour drill by a pair of teams would have a SAW and a
Assuming that your SAW doesn't have something more interesting to do in the
meantime--tank crew wouldn't be high on my list of things to worry
about.
> On Thu, 05 July 2001, Ryan M Gill wrote:
> I'm still new to Stargrunt but I've done a lot of study of infantry
And your comments are excellent. Thank you.
> But, there is now a hole in the side of the vehicle the systems are
That would suggest bailing out automatically for a "disable" and "destroyed"
result in Stargrunt terms. Would there ever be a situation where there was a
hole in the vehicle, possibly some smoke, but the crew stays inside anyway?
> I guess it all really depends on if the vehicle is just disabled or
You mention two situations: "disabled" and "holed". These are represented by
three situations in Stargrunt.
A "destroyed" result comes from a weapon penetrating the vehicle and causing
it to brew up. Casualties test armour versus twice the size class of the
weapon that hit them (they have to exceed twice the size class on their armour
roll to escape injury). This is a "holed" result that's done major damage.
A "disabled" result is the same as "destroyed" for game purposes. A weapon has
penetrated the vehicle. In this case, the armour test is against the size
class of the weapon (instead of twice the size class). This is a "holed"
result that's done some damage, sent shrapnel throughout the vehicle, knocked
out the systems, but hasn't set it on fire.
A "system" or a "suspension" result occurs from a non-penetrating round.
Either the vehicle is temporarily immobilized, or the vehicle has had all its
systems temporarily shut down. This seems a closer match to your "disabled"
result, with the added possibility that the systems may come back online.
> In both situations they count as being suppressed. In the case of the
I'm hesitant to add a second suppression marker. That would effectively end
their next activation. Since they have little control over where they end up
bailing, I think this could be a little too penalizing.
> Immediately after the Penetrating hit is reached... Surviving crew
This is what I do, though with only 1 suppression.
> An anti-armour team up close in an ambush that took out
This is allowed in the current rules, though the attack would happen wherever
they ended up after bailing out. In my own house rules, the other half of the
squad could fire on them in a form of Reaction Fire.
In message <20010705182724.9910.cpmta@c009.snv.cp.net>, agoodall@canada.com
wri tes:
> On Thu, 05 July 2001, Andy Cowell wrote:
I didn't state it, but I only do it for destroyed vehicles.
> At 2:54 PM -0400 7/5/01, Chris DeBoe wrote:
Naturally the damage is relative. I guess the bail out should be up to the
player and the intelligence of the crew. If it brews up after they decide to
stay then oh well...
> IIRC an M1 in Iraq was disabled (stuck in mud) and accounted for three
Looking at the horsepower needed for recovering a vehicle bogged down to its
wheels or in some cases deck or higher, its not surprising that it took a
while. Several M88's seem to be the norm for getting an M1 out of the mud once
the mud has taken a hold. M1's are a bit on the heavy scale of the tanks that
we normally deal with in SG. Mostly they are much lighter vehicles.
I'm struck with the image of a truck in Bosnia or someplace that the BBC was
showing taking fire (archival footage I think). It had been struck by 23mm
cannon fire from a fairly high angel and was stopped in an intersection. While
the camera is rolling the truck is still
taking fire through the top/back/side through the bed and into the
ground around it. During the incoming fire, every half beat a man jumps out of
the covered bed and runs away from the truck. It didn't burst into flames, but
there was smoke from the bottom of the vehicle (whether from a leaking fuel
tank or the engine dying and burning the oil in the crankcase up I don't know)
but the people definitely wanted away from that truck.
I suspect most of the engagements are going to be more like in Vietnam where
crewmen escaped from M113s and M47s after being struck by RPGs or running over
mines. I don't know if anyone could survive the 500lbs of explosive command
detonated under the tanks, those tended to blow the commander out of the TC
hatch and 30 feet into the air, usually in half pieces too according to the
Author of Jungle Dragoon.
> > A correct anti-armour drill by a pair of teams would have a SAW and
Ahh, but a bunch of grunts bailing out of an APC/MICV would I think?
> At 11:57 AM -0700 7/5/01, agoodall@canada.com wrote:
I guess it depends on the fire. If its really catastrophic and there is a
really loud bang, lots of Smoke and someone starts screaming "FIRE!! FIRE!!!"
then bailing out would seem to be a good idea at that point.
> > I guess it all really depends on if the vehicle is just disabled or
> You mention two situations: "disabled" and "holed". These are
Definitely a get out situation.
> A "disabled" result is the same as "destroyed" for game purposes. A
Also a get out situation.
> A "system" or a "suspension" result occurs from a non-penetrating
The crew can probably tell. I assume there is a Confidence check here. Likely
they bail out.
> > In both situations they count as being suppressed. In the case of
I don't see them doing much next turn anyhow. Though if they are all placed
around the vehicle 6" away (driver near the drivers position, TC and others
near their hatches, passengers near their hatches, then
they are also going to be dis-organized.
What you don't want is the Space Marine Land Raider is destroyed but the
Terminators still jump out and Close assault you concept.
People jumping out of a burning vehicle aren't going to be doing much else it
seems. Last time I was thrown off of my motorcycle I was good and well dazed.
Which I'd count as suppressed two or three times over.
I certainly wouldn't have been capable of grabbing the cell phone and dialing
911.
> An anti-armour team up close in an ambush that took out
Either mechanism makes sense for an anti-armour team conducting an
ambush. I can see the command rules working with this as well. The Lt in
charge of the platoon has the typical L shaped ambush arranged and he is at
the leg of the L. He's within 6" of the team at the base and 6" within a team
on the leg. He transfers his actions to the two
teams and activates them, their first actions being to fire 2 GMS/Ps
at the lead track. Then the other half of those squads open up with saws and
other nastiness.
> I'm struck with the image of a truck in Bosnia or someplace that the
> >
Or mixing guns and drugs...
lol.
> >I'm struck with the image of a truck in Bosnia or someplace that
Jon said:
> So the Forces of Light are doing ground-attack now....?
Oh, they've been doing that for several though years, as a batch of
Assyrians could testify. :-)