Long War Scenario Playtesters requested...

[TheBigRedOne]

How do those who`ve played it feel about the way a section is divided into 2 fireteams and a leader? Do you feel it reduces the firepower, adds flexibility, etc?

The fireteam thing is tricky for me, especially for the more conventional forces. For the irregulars, it's not as big of an issue. Given a hex is 40M, is it realistic to expect three guys to cover that much territory (if my memory serves on how large the fireteams were)? Most SB games have a full squad of 8-15 guys covering that same area. The other thing is that it makes them much more difficult to eliminate, given the way the attrition rules work in SB. If you are going to go with 3-5 man fire teams, you almost have to play with the Alternate Fire Density on to account for the difficulty in hitting three guys in such a large space. This, of course, makes your leaders much more vulernable and should be taken into account when designing the scenario, perhaps by adding an NCO along with the officer.

As for the removing the leader for the Taliban, I think there are other ways you could go to change things up than eliminating him. Again, slightly shifting the victory conditions would probably be a bit more realistic than giving an attacking force no way to rally their pinned men.

[Ozgur Budak]

How do those who`ve played it feel about the way a section is divided into 2 fireteams and a leader? Do you feel it reduces the firepower, adds flexibility, etc?

I find fire teams a bit out of range of SB's scale.
Two reasons:
1. Breaking down the squads makes each of the teams quite ineffective in terms of firepower which adversely effect the gameplay.
2. 40mt scale is more adequate for normal squad sized maneuvres. So the smallest maneuvre unit will not be a squad but platoon. Fire element/assault element squad types are more suitable for a smaller scale.