Home Forums Modern Operation Chunky Bandit Reply To: Operation Chunky Bandit

#137441
Just Jack
Participant

First, thanks on the batrep guys, I appreciate it.  It was a fun fight, went the right way, and kept the campaign moving forward, so I was very pleased.

Regarding the rules, thanks for jumping in Stephen, and thanks for keeping it going, John, and sorry for my delayed response, got pretty busy with work.

“I find your discussion puts your rules (concepts) very much on the line between simulation and game.”
I definitely come down more on the ‘game’ side, but want to do something that better matches my expectations of how combat should look at this echelon.  Regarding that, I’m still not decided on whether the echelon is platoon-sized with individually-based troops, or company-sized with element-based troops.  I’ve even had some fantasies about company-level with individually-based troops; sounds crazy, but it’s been done, IABSM is written that way.

“When individually based I find most rules have you making rolls with handfuls of dice…”
I’m a huge fan of 5Core’s “Kill” and “Shock” dice, and am looking hard at individually-based figures using “No End in Sight’s” version of coming up the amount of firing dice, expressed in Shock dice per weapon, with a Kill dice picked up for every two Shock dice.  This makes it easy to penalize units firing for things, like “moving units halve Shock dice,” or “pinned units count Kill dice per every three Shock dice.”  I feel like I’ll use that methodology whether the rules use individually-based troops or element-based troops.  And they’re all D6s, no fumbling for different die types, just looking for 1s and 6s, I very much enjoy simple 😉

I’m not familiar with Conflict of Heroes, but I’d love to hear more.

“I feel the combat systems which cause their need will also make their existence and utilization apparent and not be called out as some separate rule.”
I agree wholeheartedly, but that’s the whole problem, isn’t it?  I think John is up to something with this idea that a unit firing can’t do anything else until a leader breaks a foot off in their ass (I’m assuming a non-organic leader, i.e., not the fireteam or squad leader, must be the platoon or company commander).

“If you will be creating, or want to work together to create a set of rules I would be very interested in being a part of this, either here, some other site or off line.”
Great man, I appreciate it.  Progress is slow, so for not it’s just here on this thread.

“The only real chance of causing infantry casualties from direct fire is on the first turn of fire: thereafter the chances should be very small if the target has become suppressed…”
Yes, I agree wholeheartedly.

“I would penalize the shooting of pinned units too…”
I’m actually already doing that in these Chunky Bandit fights, if the pinned unit is in the open (not if they’re in cover).

“Probably indirect fire shouldn’t be penalized quite as badly.”
From which standpoint?  If you’re saying a pinned mortar team should be penalized, I agree.  If you’re saying a mortar team shouldn’t be able to hurt a pinned infantry target, I think they should, but be penalized as a lot of HE goes up and everyone is already down, but it’s still going to tear some stuff up.  When you get into company-level fire planning, whether on the assault or defense, a staple is using machine guns to fix the enemy and pound them into submission with organic (company-level) mortars.

“The effect of firing should not be linear but should be subject to diminishing returns…”
I agree, a staple here is the idea that pinned or suppressed units cannot be eliminated by direct fire, they’re going to have to be close assaulted or pounded with indirect fire.  But I’m still a fan of fire having the ability to push a suppressed element back.

“Troops need the ability to suppress more than equal numbers…”
Indeed, and when I first read this I had an idea, but now that I’ve been typing it escapes me…

“Properties of the weapons themselves, especially having more machine guns and grenade launchers.”
That would certainly add more firing dice, and what I’m thinking of is letting units split firing dice, which I’m generally not a fan of.

“The sight of friends being pinned or suppressed in close vicinity is likely to make friends act pinned or suppressed too, although should be easier to rally.”
I need to think on this a bit, but I don’t think I’m on board with that.  The way I typically handle this is that defending unit fires on attacking unit, and any excess ‘hits’ rolled are applied to any enemy units within 6″ of the target.  So if I rolled 1 Kill dice and 2 Shock dice, and I rolled up one suppression and one pin, the target would be suppressed and another enemy unit within 6″ would be pinned; you can see this in all of the Chunky Bandit fight and, from my perspective, it quickly, efficiently, and effectively handles the issue of “1st Squad just saw 2nd Squad get pinned, should 1st Squad be pinned, too?” as a separate die roll.  You roll your firepower and the effects are read and applied, couldn’t be easier (in my opinion).

Lots to think on, looking forward to continuing this chat.

V/R,
Jack