TRUDGE FOR TURDA - DETAILED RULES AND GAME MECHANICS

[lfsaunders]

Restricting Z-fire is problematic. I've found it difficult sometimes to know what is and is not allowed. I'd like a better definition of what constitutes a HMG. The weapons stats for some units aren't really clear about the class of machinegun that the unit carries. Please be specific about what is a "HMG".

By HMGs I mean dedicated, long range, heavy, tripod mounted static machine weapon :P
It is often (but given how chaotic SPWW2 coding is - I would not be 100% on that) qualified as a "Machinegun" class, just as visible on Muszynianka's screen.
Examples are Maxims, Schwarzlose's, ZB-53's and so on. It will in 99% of cases be a machine gun in 1st slot (and usually the second, too) that can fire up to 1200 or 1500, DsHK goes to 2000 metres.
I would rather NOT consider the z-fire ability for LMG Gruppes armed with a single LMG with range of 600 metres, that are commonly present in "Florian Geyer" Division. This is just 3-man skirmishing team providing fire support to main cavalry squad, they carry no tripod as well. Same applies to Soviet DP squads that are armed with 3 LMGs. Romanians and Hungarians probably do not have equivalents of those units.

I have however added an omission - fortifications are added there, as they are mostly also armed with MMGs/HMGs, but let earthen bunkers fire with all they got - it is a bunker after all, not limited personal soldiers supply of rounds.

It is up to you if you want to include armoured vehicles into this rule, this could also make sense.

Keeping in mind Muszynianka's comments, I agree that most of the time it's easy to identify HMGs. But I'm glad you mentioned armored vehicles. As I recall, although I can't point to the example right now, I ran into a tank with a 50 cal MG a while back that wasn't identified as a HMG. But I consider that a HMG. So as you say, it's not 100%. And now you've opened it up to allow fortification MMG to Z-fire. And if fortifications MMGs are allowed, why not tank MMGs? It's a slippery slope.

As to LMG Gruppes, I agree they're almost certainly not HMGs. But my personal opinion is that any belt-fed MG could be used for  suppressive fire. However, I don't want to get into this argument about how many bullets some unit may carry. So... you the boss; you make the rules. I'll play by them. Perhaps the simplest rule is: if it doesn't explicitly say HMG, it's not and it can't Z-fire. You decide.

[SaSTrooP]

The only example I can give with the mentioned .50 cal is the situation when it super rarely remains available within infantry squad. Other example would be SPMBT Norwegian platoon HQ that is a infantry unit, but is also equipped with tripod MG3.
Well, usually the common sense will be the best way to tell.
My general idea with z-fire is it is causing way too great suppressions without being even close to accurate firing and it does not consume any more ammunition than proper accurate firing. Thus I would strictly limit it to the units that are:
1) Visibly carrying overly serious firepower (like dedicated HMGs) or ammunition supply (this bunkers)
2) Are not super commonly available (thus tanks are open for adding up) to prevent lots of units at once executing z-firing

For example, for typical infantry battalion only battalion's heavy weapons company machineguns will usually be able to lay z-fire suppression. For the Soviets, where a battalion comprises of 59 units total:
- 9 out of 59 units will be able to z-fire if we exclude dedicated AAMGs (however has no serious elaboration, AAMGs are totally able to swipe the ground too)
- 12 out of 59 units if we could AAMGs in
- 14 out of 59 if we allow infantry gun howitzers fire in z-fire as well. This could make sense since in that case such gun cannot execute fire mission, so it comes at a cost

In the broadest application, less than 1/4 of all units deployed can possibly do the z-fire and this roughly gets my point.
Also, these rules can be even changed mid-game, so before final setups are taking place, talk this over and we will follow the majority here.

[SaSTrooP]

One more thought on air force.
I come to conclusion we will definitely not use the serious off-game mechanics in this campaign, comms are simply too slow to make it enjoyable. So I came with alternative idea.

Lets provide both sides with X amount of points of air strikes aquisitions. While declaring a battle, one side can attach air force via saying they want to supplement X amount of air strikes. If aircraft is shot down, obviously the number available in fiture battles goes down.
Also, it still makes use of AA weapons outside the scenario. Such AAs are simply deployed and they provide cover to eg. 2 hexes radius. I would then check if air force support coming to aid one side in a scenario did even manage to cross the AA cover. Either way I would dice roll some aerial casualties and if it was fent off - air strikes do not join the scenario.

What do you think? It is super simple to handle and totally excludes aerial battles in the campaign, what saves effort and time.

[Ratel]

I read the rules.

[Kritkeen]

One more thought on air force.
I come to conclusion we will definitely not use the serious off-game mechanics in this campaign, comms are simply too slow to make it enjoyable. So I came with alternative idea.

Lets provide both sides with X amount of points of air strikes aquisitions. While declaring a battle, one side can attach air force via saying they want to supplement X amount of air strikes. If aircraft is shot down, obviously the number available in fiture battles goes down.
Also, it still makes use of AA weapons outside the scenario. Such AAs are simply deployed and they provide cover to eg. 2 hexes radius. I would then check if air force support coming to aid one side in a scenario did even manage to cross the AA cover. Either way I would dice roll some aerial casualties and if it was fent off - air strikes do not join the scenario.

What do you think? It is super simple to handle and totally excludes aerial battles in the campaign, what saves effort and time.

I think it's a good compromise.

[SaSTrooP]

I have updated the rules on aerial combat and off-battle AA deployments. I have also slightly changed the spotting rules in No. 5 of the Rules.

[PrzemoC]

The part about Z-fire availbe for HMGs seems clear to me, but what about smoke screens avability?
I mean: infantry guns, mortars or even tanks may lay smoke screens similar to Z-fire within their LOS.
Is that tactic avaible during this campaign? I consider it realistic while direct-support, not laying smoke many kilometers away because of a single hex avaible in LOS.

[SaSTrooP]

There are no smokelaying limitations whatsoever

[SaSTrooP]

IfSaunders did poke a matter that was accidentally ommited in the rules. It is of course about river crossings.
I have added this to Point 5 of the rules, but here is the except, read and make sure you get it.

Now, about river crossings.
All rivers in the game are considered important ones that demand crossing equipment. Smaller rivers are ommited on operational map and will be represented as randomly present streams.
If crossing the river, one needs to build a bridge. To do that, units building the bridge must remain stationary for entire day and cannot be engaged by enemy land units, while artillery and aircraft fire will be resolved by Game Master and may lead to delays or other complications. Each battalion participating in the building process provides 1 crossing wooden bridge, while each engineer company provides additional one.
Example: Bridge is built from 2 hexes by two infantry battalions and engineer battalion of 3 companies. If no delays occur, after one day the attacker will be able to execute crossing attempt with 5 wooden temporary bridges - two for each battalion involved and three for each engineer company involved.

One might attempt to cross without bridges, only rafts - in such case however the attack still must be prepared for one day (delivery of the rafts etc.). It must be noted that in such case each engineer company involved provides the attacker with 2 landing barges on trucks.

River crossings are played on... well, river crossing maps. However, wooden engineer bridges are in such case added manually and the attacker selects its placement. Both ends of the bridge demand two of total objectives to be placed - one on each side. Now, the bridge CANNOT be engaged by any fire from the defender (and particularly artillery and/or tanks) for the first 8 turns counted from the initiation of hostilites by discovered enemy units - or unless a single unit crosses such bridge. The latter rule applies to each bridge separately.
Example: There are three crossing bridges. Game is 40 turns long. First shots between discovered enemies occur in turn 5 - lets say MG targeted one of the rifle teams. From that moment on, 8 turns count and at the start of turn 14 (5+8=13 till the end of it) the defender is allowed to attemp crossing destruction. However, lets say by turn 11 enemy armoured cars cross the southernmost bridge. This bridge can be engaged immediately after this situation occured.

One more thing: by engaging I mean the start of artillery plotting, not actual fire mission. If one tries to eg. demolish a bridge with 155mm battery, in the given example turn 14 is earliest possible moment where defender is allowed to plot such fire in the close vicinity of the bridge. Not the turn when shells can start falling.

The ablove rule generally aims for rough recreation of building process and later a try for bridge destruction. SPWW2 does not allow to place objects mid-scenario, so the attacker in such case must be protected as well.

[lfsaunders]

So... this seems to mean that if my unit enters a river hex (no bridge), and there is *no* enemy unit in that hex, I still need to stop, wait one whole turn and then I can move on.

Does this also mean there is no such thing as a "zone of control" (ZOC) in the hexes adjacent to a given unit. That is a friendly unit can move through the hexes adjacent to an enemy unit and as long as it doesn't attempt to move into the hex containing the enemy unit.

Or does a unit need to stop as soon as it enters a hex adjacent to an enemy unit? Or is there a movement penalty for moving through a ZOC? Or perhaps ZOC only doesn't apply when two enemy units are on opposite sides of a river.

Keep in mind that if I have to stop then I can't move into the enemy held hex and attack until the following turn. But if I don't have to stop then flanking enemy units and blocking their retreat becomes easy.

Another thing:
I understand I can't target bridges until 8 turns after the shooting starts. I'm OK with that.
Unless I "see" enemy units crossing the bridge. That implies I have a "line of site" to the bridge. No LOS... I can't see the enemy units crossing... I can't target the bridge. Correct?