FASCAM - Gamey or not?

[Liebchen]

Disrupted or not, a ground unit when faced with certain destruction would not hesitate to "breakout" through an attack helicopter unit.

Which frankly could not hold ground anyway, (and should not impede movement of ground units, another topic).

The first point is mere conjecture supported, perhaps, by projected esprit de corps. In reality, units faced with rock/hard place choices often wave the white flag, as you know. Think about the fact that (for example) a game piece can't retreat into a mine field. Sure, in real life they could say "screw the mines, I'm taking my chances in the minefield instead of taking a bullet over here." In game terms, however, there is a mix of casualties from those taking this route and POWs as the rest surrender in droves, as represented by the high number of "kills" when assaulted units can't retreat.

As for the second point, I agree that copters should not hold ground. On the other hand, I imagine running through a field being strafed by Hinds might appear fairly similar to the above minefield.

I'm not saying that I would use these tactics, guys, only that they don't seem to be any great departure or perversion of the game system.

[Volcano Man]

I think the solution was offered at the front end, that FASCAM should not isolate a unit, but would still have the effects of a mine field otherwise.
In the example TBird cited, we are not talking about one unit, but many.

Actually, it seems like the simple solution here would be to have all FASCAM / artillery delivered mines arrive as already (pre) penetrated (unless they are dropped on an existing non penetrated minefield, in which case the attack would be wasted). This would prevent FASCAM from isolating anything and present the fact that they are indeed thinly laid. Not sure if that would be done, but it makes sense to me.

I don't like the idea of making FASCAM non persistent, disappearing. It is true that FASCAM can be set to self destruct but this is not always the case. In my experiences, FASCAM can also be set to not self destruct as well. So, without getting involved in the conflict of having to represent both choices, it is probably better to leave that aspect of them alone. But I think having them arrive pre-penetrated would address the gaminess that has been mentioned.

[Zemke]

I'm not saying that I would use these tactics, guys, only that they don't seem to be any great departure or perversion of the game system.

I don't disagree with what you say about surrender, but it is the manner of HOW that would come about, or more specifically how these units got to this point, by opponents shooting 10 miles of FASCAM, and putting attack helicopters to boot on top of them.

Again, the density of a FASCAM mine field is low, and to be high would require LOTS of rounds, (see web site and do the math). Also, we are talking about un-observed fire, not observed fire, executed not at the battalion, brigade, even division level, but artillery battalions from at least Army Group and below. The coordination alone would take forever, the amount of rounds needed huge, in a military not know for it's flexibility, with no know doctrine to use FASCAM in this manner.

So ten miles of FASCAM with attack helicopters on the mine fields, which cause affected units to be isolated, but now they cannot even move into the mine field because the attack helicopters are there, and is NOT a "great departure" of the "game system", I guess we will have agree to disagree.

Anyway, now this thread has got me frustrated, I am going to let this go, and drink a nice cold glass of tea and think.

[Liebchen]

Here's another question:

Could any square mile be sufficiently covered by arty-delivered mines so as to equate to a level one minefield? Could it possibly be a better result to say that FASCAM mines cancel out road movement or fording or some other limited-area access?

Just a thought. Again, please pardon my ignorance, if I'm way off base (1985 miltech is not my forte). :chin:

[Volcano Man]

Here's another question:

Could any square mile be sufficiently covered by arty-delivered mines so as to equate to a level one minefield? Could it possibly be a better result to say that FASCAM mines cancel out road movement or fording or some other limited-area access?

That is precisely why I made the suggestion that artillery delivered mines be pre-penetrated when they arrive. It represents extremely low density fields and addresses the main issue (that FASCAM cannot be used to isolate units).