rubber-police
 
News: Clark has announced that he has started to post old LoS content (in the Media Gallery section), and will be posting more plus new content!

Author Topic: Suppression Fire  (Read 9674 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Arfiel

  • Guest
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #15 on: April 12, 2011, 11:30:33 PM »
Sorry I forgot to include stationary covering and suppressing figures get earlier fire actions.

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #16 on: April 12, 2011, 11:44:35 PM »
I'm not sure what you are on about .

Laid suppression trumps
Leadership which trumps
Covering which trumps
Normal fire (and new suppression)

Arfiel

  • Guest
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #17 on: April 13, 2011, 12:37:54 AM »
well you mentioned a figure could use leadership to move ... so I thought it might be important to point out that it was a stationary figure.

but awesome ... the game is perfect 

Offline sergeant_hastp

  • Succubot
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #18 on: April 13, 2011, 01:37:39 AM »
I co-developed a modern skirmish system with another guy in my Regiment several years ago (Presently the CO of that Regiment).

We used 1/72 scale and the ranges involved were all based on the real effective ranges of the weapon systems.  We used a big f'n table.  No where was technicallly 'out of range' for an assault rifle, let alone a machine gun.

In that system we had a Beaten Zone template for the machine guns. It was of course based on the shape of actual beaten zones according to the military publications.  There was one for the LMG, one for the GPMG, one for the HMG and even one for chainguns and light automatic cannon.

When it came time to fire one of these fully automatic weapons, you just placed the template, cut out of clear film, onto the table and oriented it properly based on the position of the gun.  It had a minimum range from the gun, not a maximum that it could be placed, because it takes distance to get the round dispersion.  Firing closer than 100m or so and you just treat it like you are firing at a point target.

Whatever figure was under the template got attacked with the gun.

If you gave the gunner an order chit for maximum fire, then you got to lay the template twice.  You could lay it end to end to make the beaten zone long and thin, or you could lay it side by side to make it shorter and wider.  You could even just keep it in the same spot and attack everyone in the zone twice rather than once.

If you spent the time to 'dig in' you could have your weapon in the sustained fire mode, which allowed you to lay the template 3 times.  Again, end to end, side to side or overlapping.

I don't recall if we had suppression per se, as in LoS or Planetstorm.  I'd have to go over it again to find out, but I believe that it was more of a covering-type system.  If you go out into that area, where the gunner has oriented himself to face, then said gunner gets to shoot first.

Just food for thought to mine for ideas.

Offline smokingwreckage

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Mk III Assault Fiend
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #19 on: April 13, 2011, 05:58:23 AM »
Just to second the idea that Suppression worked well indoors in LOS. I'd be hesitant to change that. While it's nice to have a detailed sim., the guts of a game, especially a board game, is tactical options. You need to have clear options with clear differences. In LOS suppression seemed to me to be the option you used to try to deny moves to EITHER multiple targets OR targets with Ld points. It worked very well as a game option.

You don't want, except for in a super-realistic supplemental rule perhaps, to go beyond a few distinct options. Stand for a +1, move, or run. Fire, cover or suppress. Leadership: Use, assign, or save for the initiative. Most of those also break down into immediate benefit, tactical benefit, strategic benefit. That is elegance, man. You don't mess with that!

Yeah, except for when you're setting up extra rules for people who really want the realism. That's cool too, but it needs to be clearly a rule for realists rather than straight-up game players.

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #20 on: April 13, 2011, 06:29:10 AM »
It depends on your time and range scale.  While LOS figs are 28mm (about 1/48th) the ground scale of 1" = 2m (a bastardization if ever there was one) which amounts to about 1/79th.  However, the time scale is on the order of 6 seconds per turn.  I recall that 'rapid fire' by army standards was the equivalent of one round every 6 seconds, never mind automatic bursts or anything.  To use the published effective ranges you would probably have to compress the time/ground scale by a factor of 3 to 5 or more.  That would give you 2 to 4 turns per minute and 1" being 5 to 10 metres.  But it depends on who's numbers you use.  The C1 had an effective range of 600 m and 1000 m with section fire.  I googled the M16A2 and the stats seem to say its range is 550 m for point targets and 800 m for area targets.  Meanwhile, the C7 comes up as 400 m,  but my memory tells me the number we worked with was 300 m as the effective range.  Anyways, with the most compression, then your mythical 4' x 8' gaming table is just shy of half a grid square and your C7 effective range would be 40"


But check this out:

canadian b-gl-382-003pt-001 - 2002

I found it mid-post.

The assumption in LOS is standing shots with instinctive shooting, that is only using the front sight which is why your short range for rifles is only 40 to 60 metres.  If you set a turn to aim with your sights from the prone position, the range bands of most weapons would be increased by a factor of 5 to 10.  The arbitrary maximum range of 75"  would go up to 750 m to 1.5 k which is basically your maximum range for small arms fire engagements

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #21 on: April 13, 2011, 06:33:16 AM »
For LOS (indoor) I would want to keep things close to what we have but maybe clean up things like blocked suppression.  If there are going to be changes to reflect the concerns I am discussing about support weapons, we can have one or two quick fixes but nothing elaborate like beaten zones and area suppression.

Offline bobloblah

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Mk III Assault Fiend
  • ****
  • Posts: 358
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #22 on: April 13, 2011, 09:30:07 AM »
For LOS (indoor) I would want to keep things close to what we have but maybe clean up things like blocked suppression.  If there are going to be changes to reflect the concerns I am discussing about support weapons, we can have one or two quick fixes but nothing elaborate like beaten zones and area suppression.

What were you thinking of as a problem in terms of blocked surpression? What are your thoughts on what to do with support weapons/surpression in PS?
Best Regards,
Bobloblah

Offline sergeant_hastp

  • Succubot
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #23 on: April 13, 2011, 02:06:44 PM »
  If you set a turn to aim with your sights from the prone position, the range bands of most weapons would be increased by a factor of 5 to 10.  The arbitrary maximum range of 75"  would go up to 750 m to 1.5 k which is basically your maximum range for small arms fire engagements

And yet there is no option for this, leaving the gamer with the impression that shots that exceed the listed range in the chart just...drop off or fizzle out.

The aforementioned game, as i said, is just for ideas.  If I remember correctly we used 1/72 scale soldiers, but the ground scale was 1cm=1m.  I do not recall what the time scale was.  Weapons fire was handled at section level, making the effective range of the C7A1 600m, or 6m table.  We used a large table, but it was not 6m.  Hence there was no where out of range.

Quote
Meanwhile, the C7 comes up as 400 m,  but my memory tells me the number we worked with was 300 m as the effective range.
Range for the C7 with iron sights was 300m.  With the addition of the C79 Optical sight effective individual range was increased to 400m.  Both incarnations were considered to give effective section level fire to 600m.

I'm not advocating any of this for Planetstorm.  My point is to illustrate that beaten zone effects of support weapons are meant for use when distance is involved, not at short range skirmishes or indoors.  However, if something was to be included along the lines of suppression fire for the next incarnation of Planetstorm, I would prefer to see templates you could lay down.

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #24 on: April 13, 2011, 03:22:47 PM »
Mechanically speaking, it would not be too difficult to allow for real firing ranges and firing positions. However, the bookkeeping/counter clutter would increase and the game would be slowed down due to that, plus - depending on the lay of the land - static positions and long range fire (which would be realistic but boring).

Offline sergeant_hastp

  • Succubot
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #25 on: April 13, 2011, 06:41:22 PM »
I'd be happy if Planetstorm had a nod to long range direct fire along the lines of:

Perhaps an 'extreme' range band used by full battlefield sized weapons (non-carbine, pistol or wrist rocket types)

A range band that is 'effectively unlimited' at the chosen scale. 

A range band that can only be accessed when the shooting figure is already kneeling (as per LoS), remains stationary and expends a fire action. (no covering fire shot).

The chances of hitting don't have to be very good at all, just shy of impossible perhaps, but the possibility lets the gamer know that the hardware these troops are using are truly capable of open battlefield engagement.

Just mull it around.  Long time yet before PS gets re-released I take it.

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #26 on: April 13, 2011, 07:17:38 PM »
The Joker: Do I look like a guy with a plan?

The "plan" is to get the basic rules out in a couple of months, a 3e compendium for 11-11-11, Planetstorm for next spring, Stormfront (as it was) for next GenCon.

Yes, that would be a relatively simple fix.  Maybe this: a figure can set and brace with a fire action.  It doesn't move but places two fired counters next to it instead of one to indicate it's status.  In the next initial phase you can take a shot at 7+ at anything in in LOF and LOS regardless of range.  If you don't take the shot, you are considered set and braced for the next round and get the option again next initial phase.  If you take the shot, you become fired and then proceed with the action phase. For these long range shots we use "me too" firing that is resolved simultaneously.  There are about half a dozen points to this proposed rule where you might ask "why?" and I can elaborate if anyone cares.

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #27 on: April 13, 2011, 08:56:28 PM »
How about this for LOS - indoor - suppression:

First is that we get rid of the distinction between primary and secondary squares.
Further to the, the question remains whether all square should be at 0 or -1
Second is that the target square doesn't change when blocked
Third is how to deal with suppression that is blocked and then unblocked in the same turn.

The latter interacts with covering fire and leadership and the fact that a player could potentially orchestrate the blocking and unblocking of suppression if unblocked suppression gets a new attack roll.

Offline Dave Chase

  • Succubot
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #28 on: April 13, 2011, 09:51:37 PM »
Something that my friends always talked about, it would be interesting if the doors had a possibility of jaming close if hit during a suppression fire. We never did it but our suggestion back then was if the hit number was exactly rolled the door was jamed closed and not destroyed.

Dave Chase
Freedom is the right to speak your mind.

It is also the right to walk away from those you don't want to listen to.

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Suppression Fire
« Reply #29 on: April 14, 2011, 07:16:58 AM »
Something that my friends always talked about, it would be interesting if the doors had a possibility of jaming close if hit during a suppression fire. We never did it but our suggestion back then was if the hit number was exactly rolled the door was jamed closed and not destroyed.

Dave Chase

Referring to the Rule Matrix, I think that would be an excellent optional or experimental rule.