Just to add a bit to this - there has yet to be a battle between
militaries that are both equipped with modern weapon systems, and trained in
their use
- aside from a few tank engagements in the 2nd PG War (Desert Storm),
and
those were desert fights - not a good example. As far as any
predictions as to how all these vehicles are supposed to survive this sort of
environment (excellent ATGMs, hyper-accurate tank guns), the best advice
I've seen is : Pray. Every simulation I've ever seen - from ATC reports
to
home PC games - a near-even match of vehicles and capabilities results
in carnage. You end up with a lot of debarked, demoralized infantry, and a
lot of burning hulks. As far as ranges on the SG2 battlefield go - 700m
is
really short compared with modern weapon capabilities - but if you take
the
European Central Front as an example of Terra - it's an OK one - 90% of
all sighting (LOS) ranges were 300m or less. Even the steppes of Russia have
rises & gullies to block your view. When modern vehicles do catch sight of
each other, it's over pretty quickly. As for the 'sprint' problem (cover is
500m away, why can't I make it), think of it this way. That's a long way to
move from a standing start (cover) in the open. Somebody will probably take a
shot at you. Your vehicle crew knows this, and probably doesn't want to do it.
You (the
platoon/company commander) gets on the horn and screams at/pleads with
the crew to move their lazy rears over to the designated spot (use command for
another activation). If somebody does take a shot, well, the crew did tell you
so. Combat troops are very cautious by nature. Especially about crossing open
ground that could be observed by the enemy. The limitations
on movement and the nature of the command/activation system show this.
As we all know, most of the time, the troops our little lead minis represent
are finding a way to not get shot at. The combat moves are sprints. You might
get somewhere, you might not. But you're still trying real hard to not get
shot. Travel mode assures some good ground coverage, but we are
still not assuming constant movement. There's a lot of waiting for orders,
answers to questions ('Are you sure there's no enemy around here?'), rotation
of march order, etc.
My concern with vehicles is the Firecons - can one gunner fire
multiple weapons in various turrets at one target? (slaving both remote
turrets to his board & sensors) Can a vehicle with multiple gunners and
multiple weapons fire at multiple targets in the same FIRE action?
Just to add to the general hub-bub,
Visisbility is a major concern. Do youe want that 70+ tons of
tank sprinting about in the same area as your infantry. The infantry are doing
their best job not to be seen and they tend to get nervous when the "friendly"
vehicles are running hither and there. The driver has to ensure no good guys
gum up his treads ya know.
douglase@osabs01.inet.att.co. spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> Visisbility is a major concern. Do youe want that 70+ tons of
As I think I said, their would be times. I didn' t say it would be all the
time, but I don't think it would be NEVER either. The rules (as written) just
never let you do a sprint. Nor fire on the move. I can think of a case where
I'm moving along and I don't want to stop my move but I'd sure like to fire my
fancy superstabilized weapon at a target I can only see maybe at one point in
my movement and not at the beginning or end. Now, before anyone says this
might be a hard shot, I don't disagree, but in 5 minute turns it might not be
impossible either. But the rules don't let us fire in mid movement. So it
goes.
And, from what I can see of everyone but snipers, the game doesn't really
(except if scripted into a scenario) have much hidden movement or infantry
"trying to not be seen". Since one can see (and hence manoevre against) most
of the units on the board (once they've activated, even if they were chits,
and even if they activated out of LOS of the enemy, and its only ever one side
invisible), I find the
game system does not really give itself (as an out-of-book system) to
the same kind of 'hide or die' mentality that microarmour did. Now, you still
have to use cover and move intelligently, but you don't usually have to wonder
too much where the enemy is. The trade off is
speed - I found a microarmour scenario took an average of 4-8 hours.
SG2 I can play many times in 2.5 hours. So that's one of the exchanges one
makes, and I'm not objecting.
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay Software Specialist Police Communications Systems Software
Kinetics Ltd. 66 Iber Road, Stittsville Ontario, Canada, K2S 1E7
Reception: (613) 831-0888
PBX: (613) 831-2018
My Extension: 4009
Fax: (613) 831-8255
Software Kinetics' Web Page:
http://www.sofkin.ca
SKL Daemons Softball Web Page:
http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/softhp.htm
**************************************************/
> You wrote:
> the beginning or end. Now, before anyone says this might be a hard
I'll disagree. Firing on the move with modern stabilization systems is
not that much harder--lots of shots were made moving at full speed
during Storm, the first time truly modern tanks were used in large numbers. By
the next century stationary gunnery will be a basic training exercise and
nothing more.
> activated, even if they were chits, and even if they activated out of
Whereas hide or die drives light infantry/engineer tactics to an
extreme. Cover, cover, cover. On an exercise last week, our breach team
infiltrated practically up to the wire before anyone realized we
were doing a north-south breach rather than other way around. No one
could keep track of situation with a firefight to one flank and someone
low-crawling around the other.
> Noah Doyle wrote:
> ...As far as any predictions
Yes, I've played Steel Panthers I, II & III (Steel Panthers III is very good!)
on my friend's PC, and it is extremely difficult to fight against a modern
western force with any nation's armed forces. While I don't know how accurate
the PC simulation is, it seems reasonable enough.
> My concern with vehicles is the Firecons - can one gunner fire
I can't see why not. So let's make it so. But doing two things at once is a
bit harder than doing one thing well. Let's roll the Firecon die for each
weapon, but reduce each die's type by one step, because of the coordination
required. So, if we use two weapon systems with, say, 1D10 Firecon, you would
roll 2 * 1D8. Similarly for three weapon systems, reduce the die type by two
on each; for four, reduce the die type by three on each; and so on.
> Can a vehicle with multiple gunners and multiple weapons fire at
Yes, just divide the dice according to your desire. It's a bit like having
several MG teams with your squad/fire team. However, if you are using a
points system, I would suggest that the vehicle buys a Firecon for each weapon
system. A vehicle with one Firecon allows one gunner to fire one weapon (or
multiple weapons if you use my modification above). Multiple Firecons and
physical space for extra gunners on your vehicle should allow multiple shots.
Here's an idea - give vehicles a 'travel' mode, like infantry.
Instead of a double move, they get a triple move (36") each action. This
represents really putting the hammer down. They would be fired upon at one
range die less, as infantry. They would also get no cover benefits if caught
during
a move - you're moving too fast to bother with that. If suppressed, the
next action they take MUST be a REORGANIZE (where are we, and who the hell
shot at us?). For fire on the move, take all shots at a one higher range die?
This cannot be done in travel mode. (Well, maybe with 2 range die shifts; I
put that in for some level of balance) A vehicle moving in Travel mode cannot
spot, either - except by being fired upon. Lesson - keep GMSs in
overwatch on likely vehicle dash routes...
Aside, though - I have never had an SG2 game where there wasn't
cover less
than 18"-24" away...but my games usually resemble either a small urban
fight or the NATO/WarPac Central Front...