• Havoc
  • Caius
  • redboot
  • Rules
  • Chain of Command
  • Members
  • Supported Ladders & Games
  • Downloads


experimental rules in MBT
11-05-2006, 05:00 AM, (This post was last modified: 11-05-2006, 05:05 AM by Weasel.)
#1
experimental rules in MBT
Hi Guys; Just thought I would pass on what I am currently experimenting with in MBT. Vesa and myself have noticed that the SP Score system works great for determining an outcome in a meeting engagement, but when it comes to an assault battle the outcome seems to always be a minor or medium for the attacker. We put our heads together and instead of changing the sheet, which would effect meeting engagements, we came up with two changes:

1. Flags are made to be worth only 1 point. Since flags are now so important controlling them is enough without also providing the attacker with extra points.

2. The battle point ratio has been changed. While a ME game still stands at 1:1, an advance has been dropped to 1.25:1 and an assault has been dropped to 1.5:1. What we have found is that the attacker, with the huge point advantage, almost always ends up with the majority of flags at battle end, even with HUGE losses. However, with the lesser points the defender will now have a real chance of holding a good portion of the flags at game end. Also with the flags being worth only 1 point a player must seriously weigh the worth of unit losses to flag gain.

I currently have 3 battles going with the 1 point flag, and 2 assault battles going with the 1.5:1 ratio.

And yet another experiment I am trying is an artillery FOO restriction one. Currently it seems that a player will buy 1 FOO (I am guilty of this for sure) and use that 1 FOO to fire at 20 different targets at the same time. This new rule restricts shoots to the number of FOOs you have on the board. So if you have 3 FOOs then you can shoot at 3 different targets at the same time. If you only have 1 then you can only shoot at 1. No other unit may call in artillery fire. In the three games I am currently playing there is not less then 3 FOOs per side now.

And finally I have created three new medals for those who run tournaments. Currently a player would just be awarded the Blitz Achievement Medal with a right up, which led to a lot of "generic" medals by some players. Therefore I created the three attached medals which are the Tournament bronze, silver, and gold. The officers have still to agree, but right now it seems that the awarding will be:

bronze for tournaments 1 and 2, silver for 3 and 4, and gold for 5. Then the method restarts with bronze again. Duncan was the first recipient of the Tournament Bronze medal for his Poland '39 tournament.

So that is it. Hopefully others will try out the experimental rules and let us know how it goes. I will also update this thread once the outcomes are achieved.


[attachment=720][attachment=721][attachment=722]
Some of us are busy doing things; some of us are busy complaining - Debasish Mridha
Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2006, 07:08 AM,
#2
xThumbs_up  RE: experimental rules in MBT
Hello Weasel,

I like this alot.. also something to consider is this..

Most full infantry companies come with imbedded mortars of some sort.. the only unit that should be able to direct these mortars should be the Company CO, or a unit designated as the fire direction team - not a FO unless he comes attached to the company.

Also, many countries have a battalion support/weapons company of some sort. These usually include a couple of mortar squads or other indirect fire artillery types. Perhaps these should only be directed by the weapons company CO - and the support company shouldn't be available until at least a battalion of troops are on the map (normally 3 companies per battallion?).

One question though.. what do you consider a 'target'.. a single hex.. a center of fire with a radius from the center.. a selected area for interdiction fire where a battery may be shooting in the same general vicinity, but each gun is targeted with about a 2 hex spacing?

Perhaps the FO can only direct the fire of a single complete battery (appx 4-6 shooting units - or one off-map unit) at a time?

I usually play larger games, and always have multiple FO's around.. just in case something unexpected happens..

-Greybeard
Quote this message in a reply
11-07-2006, 07:52 PM,
#3
RE: experimental rules in MBT
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.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Quote this message in a reply
11-08-2006, 04:43 AM,
#4
RE: experimental rules in MBT
Greybeard Wrote:Hello Weasel,

One question though.. what do you consider a 'target'.. a single hex.. a center of fire with a radius from the center.. a selected area for interdiction fire where a battery may be shooting in the same general vicinity, but each gun is targeted with about a 2 hex spacing?


-Greybeard

We are calling a single hex a taget. As far as I know artillery is called in on a single target and the spread occurs naturally. If you go otherwise then you will just end up with a FOO spreading the arty all over the place again. Vesa and myself had a bunch of different ideas such as spread etc, but then decided to keep it as simple as possible. Therefore 1 FOO = 1 target. And as a followup to this, in a game yesterday I wanted to drop smoke. Now normally my 1 FOO that I normally buy would have made a nice long line of smoke about 12 hexes long, or 600 meters. Not to be, I called in the smoke on the hex and am hoping for spread. And you know what, it just felt right too.

As for the company assets right now we have not considered that and are still going with the 1 FOO 1 Shoot. Also there is no limit to the amount of tubes the FOO can call on a target as there is no limit in real life.

If I were to consider company assets then I would go with the idea that each company should have a FOO attached, as in real life. But like I said, we haven't gotten that far yet.
Some of us are busy doing things; some of us are busy complaining - Debasish Mridha
Quote this message in a reply
11-08-2006, 04:51 AM,
#5
RE: experimental rules in MBT
Walrus Wrote: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.
Some of us are busy doing things; some of us are busy complaining - Debasish Mridha
Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2006, 11:35 PM,
#6
RE: experimental rules in MBT
Quote this message in a reply
11-14-2006, 06:37 AM,
#7
RE: experimental rules in MBT
RERomine Wrote:I figure I'll throw in my two cents on this.

Consider for your one forward observer, one fire mission rule, the concept of distribution. There are four basic distribution methods:

1. BCS Sheaf: This is standard. The target area is construed as an area 100 meters in diameter. (Target hex + 1)

2. Converge Sheaf: All tubes target a single spot. Good for hard targets such as bunkers or buildings. (Target hex)

3. Open Sheaf: Harassing fire. The target area is circular, but splash effects of rounds don't overlap. (Large guns: Target hex + 2; all others Target hex + 1)

4. Linear Sheaf: For linear targets, i.e., defensive lines, convoys, etc. If target width 5 times or greater than depth, rounds are fired in a line along target. (Target hex, being center mass, with subsequent hexes extending toward both ends of the target)

These are all legitimate fire missions and allow the rule you are proposing to not be too readily defeated by overly dispersing units. The information above can be found in 4-6, section e in the link below:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/l...index.html

Hi; Thanks for this, but once again we are trying to keep it as simple as possible. Also we have found in our current game that the artillery is landing all over the place anyway, even when targeted to a single hex. Plus this is just an experiment we are conducting, players can do whatever they wish, we are just seeing how these rules would effect game play. So far the 1 FOO 1 Target is working great and I truly like it. Can't see not playing without it in the future.

But keep the suggestions coming, that is what makes the ladder a great place.

Cheers.
Some of us are busy doing things; some of us are busy complaining - Debasish Mridha
Quote this message in a reply
11-14-2006, 06:14 PM,
#8
RE: experimental rules in MBT
I can confirm Weasel's observation, I fired at two targets with 5 mortars each. The spread was 400-500 meters in both cases. I call it "All over the place sheaf" in the future :)
Vesku

[Image: Medals50_thumb8.gif]
Quote this message in a reply
11-15-2006, 05:55 AM, (This post was last modified: 11-15-2006, 03:38 PM by General SP.)
#9
RE: experimental rules in MBT
Think first, fight afterwards - the soldier's art
Quote this message in a reply
11-16-2006, 07:53 AM,
#10
RE: experimental rules in MBT
I've found that by using FO's with an experience bonus, the scatter factor can be reduced.. so I buy at least 2 FO's.. one 'average' and one 'elite'.. the average guy gets to practice his skills shooting interdiction fire.. the elite guy steps in and takes over when a real target is found, and a good FFE pattern in needed..

Then if they can get eyeballs onto the target hex, the elite FO really makes a big difference in the scatter effect..

-GB
Quote this message in a reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)