Proper Use of Scout Vehicles

[Crossroads]

You do know that artillery was prolonged and could be pivoted by hand after it dismounted?
I've seen video of smaller caliber guns be pushed by their crews.

That's right, when engaging direct fire using gun optics that's what happens. When firing indirect fire it takes longer though, as the gun needs to be positioned properly then the chassis (I do not know the proper english term) needs to be dug in / support to ground so it does not move about when firing.

I think. I did not of course serve with the guns, the computer geek that I am. Oh no, I was stationed and warmly ducked in the tent where we did the calculations for the battery

But there seemed to be awful a lot of sweating and swearing when we changed positions, before being able to commence firing again.

Yes, I agree smaller caliber guns were easy to switch around. The 130mms that were the actual equipment definitively did not move about though. Hence I felt the Panzer Leader optional rule made the sense. And there was a calibre range for guns that had no penalty, and guns that could not swing about at all before spending a turn turning around.

[Herr Straße Laufer]

"Changing positions" as in pivoting the guns, or moving the guns?

I was not speaking of direct fire by sights. I was speaking of adjusting the facing to reach another grid area.

Though I do like the idea of limiting the guns direction of fire when it is firing directly and not indirectly.

We'd also have to ask how much work would it take to program it into the system and how much it actually would be needed in the game?
If they cannot do it for the pillbox or bunker, I would guess they could not do it for the gun?



HSL

[junk2drive]

We started with scouting and now guns.

I don't think there needs to be a change. We are abstracting a platoon of guns in a hex. I could however see the logic in treating them like armour with the facing rules turned on.

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Funny how offshoots happen?

The old line, "go where the wind blows?"

I guess we should have gone on a separate thread? :pendulum:

:cheers mate:

HSL

[Askari19]

Back to the scouting/recon question... Armies had different doctrine for these troops. German reconnaissance forces were heavily armed relative to most others of the era, were expected to fight for information, and very often found themselves in a "fire brigade" role, as a powerful mobile reserve. Especially when the scenario provides more than a few armored car sections, any and every tactical usage the player can come up with would be reasonable in terms of doctrine and practice in the Heer and Waffen SS, IMO.

In game terms, I think it is entirely reasonable to make the same assumption for any scout or recon elements, Soviet, American, or otherwise. You pay a price for losing them, so weight risk vs. benefit and have at it. In most armies, any commander in an uncertain situation, blessed with the support of any dedicated scout/recon troops, would use them aggressively to provide real time intel on enemy dispositions and advance warning of imminent contact; and even cavalry-like exploitation in the enemy rear areas is not unreasonable. As pointed out by Scud, you'll sooner or later pay a price for using them thusly - and the threat will keep the opponent honest in terms of positioning of arty and HQ and rear area security in general. The difference between our scenarios and the historical context is that with FOW in this game, the fruits of prior battlefield reconnaissance and good staff (G-2) work are not represented. I'd venture to say that very few division/brigade/regiment size actions in the war kicked off without considerably more intel on enemy dispositions than provided by the sighting rules in JTCS, and the scenario briefing.

Play the hand you're dealt, and let not your heart be troubled.