Thanks everyone for the tips! I think this turned off the HTML, but let me
know if HTML is still going up.
In the game that I talked about, we didn't use the weapons as dual mounted
ones (with the M577 APC's twin DFFGs and MGs), might try that extra thing next
time though.
I have another question that kinda goes with the fireteam discussion from last
week. How big of a force do a lot of you guys field in a typical Stagrunt
battle?
My game with my nephew was pretty small as my collection of 25mm troops is
rather limited. But here is a quick overview of what we fielded:
USMC
Two rifle sections broken down into their squads 1st Section Unit one: Section
Sergeant
Unit two: 1st Squad with 3 riflemen (ARw/GL 3FP), 1 SAW (1d10Impact)
Unit three: 2d Squad same as above 2d Section: Same as above
2 M577 APCs (we just used them as AFVs- didn't carry the troops)
2 Sentry guns: used house rules for them USMC Company mortars
French 1/5th Demi Legion
5 Fireteams (squads) with 3 riflemen (ARw/GL 3FP) and 1 SAW (same as the
USMC)
1 ATGM team (GMS/P)
4 GMS/Ls as remote weapons- one to most of the fire teams
1 Platoon command team (three guys as above)
We went for small 'squads' because I had only about 50 mini troops to go
around... so we each had more units to activate. We had a roughly equal
number of units, however, I think treating the USMC section sergeants as
independent leaders unbalanced the game because it gave my nephew more extra
attempts to activate his units... plus I underestimated how tough the M577s
were with decoys... I had too few GMS/Ls to get through the decoys. Not
to mention I didn't issue IAVRs to the French! An oversight I plan to fix next
time!!
Our fight was a small one in numbers of miniatures, I think, but it lasted a
good 6 hours! How does this stack up to games the rest of you guys play?
Curious
> --- Scott Case <tgunner@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the tips! I think this turned
All looks good to me, but then again Yahoo is notoriously retarded.
> last week. How big of a force do a lot of you guys
I usually run a reinforced platoon (32 guys in the platoon, plus vehicles for
a mech platoon). Since NRE
stuff is top-of-the-line, a balanced OPFOR for me is
generally 2 platoons or a platoon with some serious support. Of course, that's
for a meeting engagement with no artillery support. With doctrinal artillery
or the advantage of defensive positions, you need more.
> We went for small 'squads' because I had only about
You can do it that way, but such small units have so little firepower I rarely
find they are worth it (unless elite or something). But then again, I'm a
follower of the creed of the Holy Fathers of the
Perpetual Railgun, and prefer my 8-10 man squads with
2 SAWs.
> attempts to activate his units... plus I
IAVRs, 2-3 per 4-man fireteam is about right. At
least if you're a sick bastard like myself.
Hi Scott,
> I have another question that kinda goes with the fireteam discussion
<snip force description>
I have the figures to support company-size games of Stargrunt, but we
only ever consider doing that once or twice a year. You need a lot of table
space, and quite a bit of time...
It's fun though:)
Our "normal" games are usually in the range of a platoon on each side, plus
something "interesting" to add a bit of spice to the game. The "interesting"
might come from specific scenario conditions, extra force in the form of
combat walkers or other light vehicles, specialist troops like mortars or
engineers, or something like that.
If we're doing a meeting-engagement, I try to balance out the scenario
and forces, not necessarily purely with numbers of figures but with a
combination of numbers, types (ie PA or non-PA), vehicles, special
equipment, mines, leadership level and quality level. This way we can field a
big force against a much smaller, but better quality and more potent, force
and still have a good game.
Sometimes we set up completely unbalanced force scenarios (2 or 3 platoons
versus 1 platoon, for example) but have very different mission parameters. The
classic for this is the "attack vs. a prepared defender" type scenario. We'll
set up the attacker to be arriving in a "hasty assault", so they haven't had
time to prep the place with massive arty or whatever, but the defender has
been in place long enough to put out a few mines and get some decent
positions. Then we see how long the defenders can hold out, etc.
I like the idea of being able to do flexible-size games like this,
rather than playing the same 2 or 3 forces against each other all the time. As
such, I've bought a couple of platoons (during the Christmas sales at GZG) of
the "generic mercenary" SG figs. I'm going to paint them up in relatively
generic colours, and then I will use them to add to any of my other "national"
forces (of which I have a number of single platoons painted). That way, I can
do a 2 or 3 platoon force without having to actually paint 3 platoons of one
nationality, and since I have a bunch of
painted one-platoon national forces, the next time, the 3 platoon force
can be someone different. But again, games of that size don't happen as often
as the one or one+reinforcements platoon per side type games. They just
take too long to play to do it often, much as I like the sight of lots of figs
on the table....
As to force composition, I tend toward 6 to 8 model squads, rather than the
little ones. You were doing that because you wanted to spread the figs around,
and that makes sense, but I personally find the game more satisfying if the
squads are a bit bigger. Tom Barclay is a big fan of the "break down squads
into fire teams, and play them as separate units" school of Stargrunt. I just
assume that the actions of fire teams are built into the way squad actions
work in Stargrunt, so leave them all together in 8 model squads. Tom's
version, with lots of little fire teams in a platoon, might be a bit more
"realistic", but I find that you end up with too many units, and the game
takes too long to play. Tom adds Platoon Sergeants and Officers as independent
figures, and has a set of house rules for using them with extra command
activations (if your're interested, you can find them in the house rules
section of www.stargrunt.ca). If I want to have more units, I'd rather add a
second platoon of 8 model squads. Slightly different playing styles, but
either way works well, as long as you have a decent scenario.
***************************************
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 22:56:00 , "Scott Case" <tgunner@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Our fight was a small one in numbers of miniatures, I think, but it
I have over 70 NSL panzergrenadiers, plus about 8 power armour guys. I have
over 80 Japanese Corporate Mercenaries, and about the same number of power
armour. I have extras waiting to be painted to bump up the number of power
armour on both sides, and to give the Japanese 2 SAWs per squad.
I typically play with big squads, because I think -- with SG2's ground
scale
and other factors -- fireteams are factored in already. The Japanese
have 8 man squads, the NSL 6.
The number of squads, not figures, is usually a bigger indicator of how long
the game takes to play. I usually put a platoon of figures per side on the
table, which is around 30 to 40 figures, depending on the side. I have two
platoons worth of Jagers to paint up, and these guys being much lower in
armour I'd probably end up using more of them per side.
Again, it depends on the scenario. I try not to go over the 30 to 40 limit for
the biggest side if both have the same armour, as larger numbers of figures
means the game takes more than 4 hours. Three to 4 hours is typical, as most
of my games have been designed for conventions.
Now, I also have American Civil War rules I've developed for SG2. I can play
with MUCH larger sides (100 per side, no problem) in the same span of time,
due to the rules I developed for formations.
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 00:50:25 -0500, adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca wrote:
> I just assume that the actions of fire teams are built into
I'm with you, Adrian!
Allan, or anyone else, Do you have any pictures of the Japanese power armor?
I've been thinking about ordering some, but I'd like to know what it looks
like first. Also, how do you paint up Japanese Mercenaries? I've got a group
of 9, and I'm not entirely sure how I want to paint them. Usually deciding on
the color scheme is what takes longest for me with painting.
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:21:41 -0600 (CST), "Randy W. Wolfmeyer"
> <rwwolfme@artsci.wustl.edu> wrote:
> Do you have any pictures of the Japanese power armor?
Yes I do. If you, or anyone else, would like, I'll scan them and send them to
you.
> I've been thinking
Also,
> how do you paint up Japanese Mercenaries? I've got a group of 9, and
I was unsure until I saw KR's at GenCon. I painted them more or less like his:
a pattern of brown and cream. It's not camouflage, thus essentially
unrealistic, but it works. I like how it contrasts with my other figures.
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:21:41 -0600 (CST), "Randy W. Wolfmeyer"
Also,
> how do you paint up Japanese Mercenaries? I've got a group of 9, and
FWIW, our tradestand display ones have mid-green suits with pale green
armour plates... sounds odd but actually looks good....