experimental rules in MBT

[Weasel]

Hi Guys

I like the ideas you have mentioned.
I think it is a good point that Greybeard make as to what is the defination of a "target".
Do you have to target 6 guns from a batttery at one hex? In a way that seems fair and realistic, rather than spreading the same six tubes around a 10x10 hex area for example.
Plenty of room for debate here I think.

Also I like the idea that the Company CO can be the only unit to call fire from the company mortar...or as was mentioned, the battalion support company's mortars.
It is a good idea to limit the arty calling to the correct units.
As a wargamer rather than an ex military type, I call fire from whoever has the smallest delay and I will happily put one tube per target scattered all over the map. I am sure that is very unrealistic, but it works in the game and ins not "gamey", or at least not yet.

It can be very hard to get all these rules happening without slowing the game down but I guess once you negotiate and get it sorted it doesn't need to be discussed in future game...though there can always be confusion...sorry about that Chris :rolleyes:

My personal gripe is the use of smoke round in the advance. I just don't think it is realistic (but what would I know eh :P) for infantry to advance 150m then throw a smoke grenade to stop themselves being an open target in the next phase of the turn. This is especiallly annoying when said unit is moving for a number of turns in a row.
Now, I admit to using this technique all the time as you really must or get wiped out, however it just seems unrealistic. Popping smoke on the defense seems more realistic, or throwing a smoke grenade to cover lateral movement through building etc...

I figure that smoke cover for an advance should be provided by arty units, or even direct fire (smoke) by AFVs or small mortars etc rather than inf/enginers jumping out of their carriers and popping smoke at the end of the turn.

bla bla bla...I think I have had a whinge about this before.
Enough said.

It's good to see players trying to get more realism into the games...cheers Cheris and Greybeard for your input.

BTW. Chris, my computer rebuil begind tomorrow. Hopefully I will be in a position to receive your turns in a couple of days. i'll give to an email when I am ready to roll. Cheers for waiting mate.

As I replied to Greybeard, a target is a hex. And yes have each gun of a battery fire at different targets is very unrealistic. The most you would get is a section at one target, and another at another. However, to consider that the same FOO can call and control these two shoots is not realistic. And no it has not slowed down our game play at all. My two experimental games are coming along nicely, and it is great to not see artillery spread all over the place.

The problem with zero units calling in fire is this: I tried a version of this rule a while ago, with only FOOs and zero units being allowed to call in shoots. Suprisingly enough, the shoots from the FOO and the zero unit seemed to take the same amount of time to land. Why? Because the zero unit wasn't calling in the shot, the FOO was. So the player would say, "my zero unit called in that shoot, and my FOO called in this one". Well how are you to know that the FOO didn't call in all of them?

The only way I could see around it is to ensure that the zero unit has a LOS to the target. Afterall, company assets are designed to support the company with quick artillery on call fire, not to send out interdiction and harrassment shoots.

So once again it boils down to trying to keep it as simple as possible. One FOO equals one shoot.

Yes infantry walking across a field and throwing smoke is absurd when not in contact. Grunts just don't carry so much ordance that they can throw it around without a cause. Not done in the infantry unit I was part of for seven years. I actually don't like to do it when not in contact, since it just advertises to your opponent were you are.